Skip to main content

Full text of "Torn in two : 150th anniversary of the Civil War ; an exhibition from the collections of the Boston Public Library, May 12 to December 31, 2011"

See other formats






i. i 











ll-Gri]--'- "--'-' 
II— Bminc tf BIIm' komestead by 

and Capt. Dalt 
ndin[ FcDHSjlTaiha ■■ji^ihhi>. 
G«[u- Lane and Petdfrew'i bri[tde«, C. 5. A. 
r. — ^ cntbyBuford'iC»T.*C™tler'iiatBrii,A.C. 

id 13th M»u. Vols. Tilden'* i6th M 

37— 33d Mast., lit niikt. 

/ M— Lieat. Mot " " " ' " 

_ _ , t Pa., portia 
H — Senoinary Tower, uc^i u u^ i> v: 

35— Gen. J«hn C. Robinaon's diy. isi a. o. 1210 

35— Town of G«ttyibuTS, two mile« to the South. 37— 33d Mass., lit niikt. 

38— Sergeant Morris killed. " . . ■• .- -. --■-.- - v ,» ^o .» , 

wounded. Gen, Fairchikl lost m 
39— lit Delaware, rzth New Jersey, 14th Cuim. *i siunc „^,. .«,.« ^i. ^. »».-. 

-40— Battery A, isl R. I. L, A,, Lieot, Arnold. Lieut. Child's arm paralized by sharp shooter a,t Bliia' kouse. 
■41— Cemetery Hill, Gtn. O. O. Howard, com'g. HaH's Me. Bat., Underwood's 33d Mass. Inf., McCartney's lit Mms- Bat 
42— Gulp's Hill. i2th A. C-, Gen. Williams, com'dg. Base of Hill. Col. Chas. R. Mudgc and 2d Mass. sacrificed. 
43 — Powers* Hill. Headquarters Gen. Slocum, com'dg right of lint" 
■44- Grand Charge ;27th Ind., 3d Wis., 2d Mass. 114 offi 

45— Camp wagons used as ambulances, CaHytDg off the wounded. 46— Tempera 

48— Wheeler's New York Battery coming into action. 49— Mead's first headqatrW 

50— Wounded of 145th Pa. Inf. Vols, stationed to shoot deserters. 51— Gen. Hunt and Col. Osbo 

52— Art. reserves and ammunition, Col. D. W. Flagler com'dg. 53— Gen. Patrick's Provost h'dq'ra on Ealtunoit road. 

" " ~ "■ "' " 1. Birney's h'dqr's. 56— Gen. Pleasanton'a Cavalry h'd 

„_t. 57— 3d Div,. 2d A. C. Col. N. J. Hall, cotn'dg. 19th Mass., Col. Deateraiu. 
^^■^I'dg, 42d New York, Col. Mallon. 7th Va. 7th Mich. 

r.^f -^3 

«D HI Hill THIS "IF 


.id*prDi 9inqs53Uiui3 — J-g "jui ■ 

■ -HDid: uoijjoj— 2S "^A JO '*^-^ " 

^ 'A 'M MJot"' 'aJiinc-Ji.i 

aJ^sSuoT p ssjndaj pu 
10::, 'osiv 











































An exhibition organized by the 
Norman B. Leventhal Map Center at the Boston Pubhc Library 


% TtilRD I 


371^ VA 




H W M IK K H B^ 


r£NCE \ 


0/?r?///l R^ 


ff Ncv: 









A.. T. McEae, C. S. A. 

Quitmaa Guards, First Reg't Ga. Vol's, 



BANH />, 

— iii 





f///>i 1 1 1 1 



^ ^K''/^'^'^ 









v.vT;c?t^aVT<^^UMP OF BUSHES' 





Vk!V V VkjV 


An exhibition organized by the 
Norman B. Leventhal Map Center at the Boston Pubhc Library 



N inr 


'' from the collections of the 
Boston Public Library 
MAY 12 TO DECEMBER 31, 2011 

Exhibition Catalog Written by 

Ronald E. Grim and Debra Block, with contributions by Angela Bonds, 

Stephanie Cyr, Monique Doyle Spencer, and Catherine Wood 

Edited by 

Janet H. Spitz and Dale Rosen 

Foreword by 
Amy E. Ryan 


Essays by 

Debra Newman Ham, Susan Schulten, David Bosse, Richard F. Miller and 

Ronald E. Grim 

Publuihed by 

The Norman B. Leventhal Map Center at the Boston Public Library 

BOSTON, 2011 

Ensign, Bridgman & Fanning, OUR NATION'S HEROES. New York, 1863. Printed map, 53 x 24 inche.i. 

Norman B. Leventhal Map Center 
at the Boston Public Library 
700 Boylston Street 
Boston, MA 02116 

© 201 1 by The Norman B. Leventhal Map Center, Inc. 
All rights reserved 

Printed in the United States of America 

ISBN 978-0-615-47402-1 (soft cover) 

Designed by one2tree • Printed by Universal 

[Back cover] 


Ca. 1866. Printec) map, 16 x 16 iiichej. 

lElIlIf 101 f 001 

The Grolier Club, Ne^v York 
FEBRUARY 22 TO APRIL 28, 2012 

Osher Map Library, Portland, Maine 
APRIL 1 TO AUGUST 30, 2013 

T^lLl OF COlTllTi 

Foreword, by Amy E. Ryan 


8 Introduction 

1 "Thenceforward and Forever Free: "A Brief Oi'erview of the Que<itfor Emancipation in the United States) 
Debra Newman Ham 

20 Mapping the Sectional Cruiui: Cotton, Slaveiy, and the Strength of the RebelLion 
Susan Schulten 

30 The Parlor War: Civil WarMap^i in the Popular Media 
David Bosse 

38 The Battle of BalU Bluff Would Terrain Mapj Have Made a Difference? 
Richard F. Miller 

48 Remembering the War through Mapd: Creating the Geth/iihurg Podt-Battle Mapd 
Ronald E. Grim 

€Af ALOO OF Til lElIlIf 101 

60 BEFORE THE WAR • Rising Tensions 
One Country, Two Cultured 
An ti- Sla very Mo vemen t 
Sectionalism and We<ftern Expan^iion 

90 DURING THE WA R • * Nation in Conflict 
Geograplry of War 
Living Room War 
Bodton — Engine of War 

130 AFTER THE WAR ••• Heroes Remembered 
Bodton Rememberd 

148 Bibliography 

150 Acknowledgements and Sponsors 

The Norman B. Leventhal Map Center at the Boston Pubhc Library has taken the lead in 
commemorating the Civil War with the exhibition TORN IN TWO, 150th Aiiiiwer^faiy of 
the Civil War, displayed in the historic McKim Building in Copley Square. Torn in Two is a 
groundbreaking exhibition and serves as the cornerstone of the Boston Public Library's cily-^vide 
commitment to Civil War programming, exhibitions, and educational outreach this year. 

While Torn in Two focuses on the conflict from 1861-1865, it also explores the causes of the 
war and the process by -which the war is remembered through the lens of fifty hrstorrc maps 
and scores of rare materials from the Irbrary's specral collections. Numbering over 1 .2 million 
items, these treasured manuscripts, artworks, and historic objects include a major archive of 
anti-slavery documents, printed materials, and artifacts. Some of the highlights include Mathew 
Brady's iconic photographs, a painting and prints by acclaimed artist Winslow Homer, Currier 
& Ives political cartoons, and thousands of maps and other materials. Many of these items were 
acquired through an endowment established by the 20th Massachusetts Volunteer Regiment, one 
of the most honored regiments of the Crvil War. It ^vas and still remains a tremendous gift. 

There are many people to thank for making the Torn in Two exhibition possible. I am extremely 
grateful to the entire Boston Public Library staff and the many supporters who have helped 
to make this extensive Civil War-related programming possible. I especially want to thank 
Norman Leventhal for his vision and generosity in creating the Map Center at the Boston Public 
Library. I also am very grateful to Alan and Sherry Leventhal who have supported this project 
throughout the process. We are extremely fortunate to have Liberty Mutual, whose support of 
the exhibition, national tour, catalog, and virtual tour -will make it possible for people all over the 
world to become acquainted with the Boston Public Library's great treasures. 

Amy E. Ryan 

Proident, Bo^iton Public Libraiy 

May 1,2011 

Liberty Mutual takes great pleasure in sponsoring the Norman B. 
Leventhal Map Center's presentation of TOMN IN TWO, 150th Anniversary of 
the Civil War. We can think of no better way to mark the anniversary of this 
conflict, one of the most cataclysmic and defining events in U.S. history, 
than through education. We're sure the public will enjoy and appreciate 
the richness of what this exhibit represents: the history of our great country 
on display at the Boston Public Library — an architectural and educational 
gem. As a global insurance company that has been proud to call Boston 
its home for almost 100 years, v^e are pleased to join Norman Leventhal, 
a man who has helped shape the city into what it is today, in making this 
exhibition possible. 

Edmund F. Kelly 

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Liberty Mutual Group 



In many ways, the Civil War 
represents a watershed in the 
history of the United States. 
As a result of the conflict, the 
Federal government solidified 
its dominance over the states. 
The North won and it was its 
vision of America that would 
prevail. Industrial production 
in factories using a free labor 
force would grow rapidly in 
the nation's cities. Despite 
an expanding diversity in 
these bursting urban areas, 
increasingly dominated by 
the seemingly endless streams 
of immigrants from Asia and 
Europe, the rise of mass media 
created common reference 
points that masked these 

Yet what transpired was not 
a departure from what came 
before but an acceleration 
of trends in transportation. 

communication, and 
manufacturing. These factors 
led to the creation of and 
eventual predominance of an 
urban middle class lifestyle. 
These changes were neither 
pervasive nor monolithic yet 
the veneer persisted that our 
nation's motto, E Plurlbiu 
Uimin — "one out of many" — 
had come to pass. And it would 
be this middle class that would 
set the standard for a public 

The cities of the republic also 
had a growing working class 
that demanded its own leisure 
pursuits. All of these forces 
combined to create strong 
demand for and the ability to 
supply a wide variety of printed 
materials. By the mid- 19th 
century maps, photographs, 
lithographs, and other visual 
media were quickly and easily 

produced and transmitted to a 
growing and eager audience. 

The war greatly increased 
the desire for these images. 
Maps in particular became 
crucial to tell the story of the 
conflict. Those on the home 
front were desperate for news 
of military campaigns, both to 
locate loved ones and to learn 
about hitherto unknown battle 
sites. Crucial to the successful 
execution of military campaigns, 
the absence of reliable 
cartographic information 
led to high casualties. The 
Federal government's practice 
of preparing after-battle maps 
was both a form of historical 
documentation as well as the 
assertion of a central authority 
that increasingly insisted on 
uniform standards. 

It is this wide range of 
popular media, so well 

represented in the Boston 
Public Library's special 
collections, that forms 
the core of our exhibition 
commemorating the 150th 
anniversary of the American 
Civil War. We have 
commissioned the following 
five essays to help us explain 
ho^v the American nation was 
almost "torn in two. " Although 
each focuses on only one aspect 
of the story, together they 
provide a variety of geographic 
and cartographic perspectives 
for understanding one of the 
most important chapters in our 
nation's history. 

Two articles focus on the 
antebellum period. Debra 
Newman Ham explores what 
could be termed the geography 
of freedom, by highlighting 
important aspects of the African 
slaves' quest for emancipation 
in "Thenceforward and Forever 
Free: A Brief Overview of 
the Quest for Emancipation 
in the United States." 
Conversely, Susan Schulten 

examines the geography of 
slavery, by analyzing the first 
thematic maps that displayed 
the extent of the nation's 
cotton production and slave 
population. She places these 
maps within the context of 
the political landscape that 
led to disunion in "Mapping 
the Sectional Crisis: Cotton, 
Slavery, and the Strength of the 
Rebellion, " where she notes the 
problems related to extending 
slavery into newly acquired 
territories as the 19th century 

The next two essays turn 
to the war itself. David Bosse 
examines the rise of journalistic 
cartography as he identifies the 
role that maps played in the 
media helping to bring the story 
of war to the home front in "The 
Parlor War: Civil War Maps in 
the Popular Media. " Richard 
Miller examines the problem 
of obtaining good terrain 
intelligence for military strategy, 
by detailing the importance 
of maps to a single battle and 

questions the results had better 
cartographic information been 
available to northern troops 
in "The Battie of Balls Bluff: 
Would Terrain Maps Have 
Made a Difference?" 

The final essay focuses 
on the aftermath of the war. 
Ronald Grim examines the role 
of maps that were created as 
part of the historical record to 
help shape a common historical 
and geographical memory. He 
explains the process by which 
after-battle maps of Gettysburg 
were created in "Remembering 
the War through Maps: 
Creating the Gettysburg Post- 
Battle Maps," and explores 
the role such maps played in 
memorializing the war. 

Together these essays, 
along with the ninety items 
displayed in our exhibition, 
reveal that this was a war that 
was documented unlike any 
previous war, and the issues that 
dominated the headlines during 
the Civil War years continue to 
engage us today. 

fill 111 FOllfll Fill 

A Brief Oi^eri^iew of the Quest for Emancipation in the United States 

BY DEBRA NEWMAN HAM • Morgan State University, Baltimore, Maryland 

The Emancipation Proclamation, effective January 1, 1863, 
was a giant step toward freedom for all slaves in the United 
States. President Abraham Lincoln's letter to newspaper 
publisher Horace Greeley dated August 22, 1862, said, in part: 
My paramount object in thu struggle id to save the Union^ and id not 
either to sai^e or to destroy sLu^ety. If I could sai^e the Union without 
freeing any slave I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the 
slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving 
others alone I would also do that. What I do about s Livery ^ and the 
colored racC; I do because I believe it helps to save the Union ..." 

President Abraham Lincoln 
was clear that his purpose 
for fighting the ^var was to 
"save the Union" rather than 
abolish slavery. Yet, his dislike 
of slavery and the fact that 
slavery was a causal factor for 

the War Between the States 
cannot be denied. 

In fact, while the furor 
over slavery escalated in the 
first half of the nineteenth 
century and continued up 
to and through the years of 

the Civil War, many of the 
seeds of controversy between 
the North and the South 
^vere planted before the 
Constitutional Convention 
of 1787. The protracted 
War of Independence itself 





FIGURE 1 • Detail i:rom A M^ip of t/;>e Yearly Meeting of Fiiendj for New Eiiffland 

[S.I., 1850], sho-wing the location of Quaker meeting houses in eastern Massachusetts (see pp. 74-5). 

afforded thousands of blacks 
the opportunity to gain 
their freedom. Black men 
voluntarily enlisted as soldiers 
and fought in the American 
Revolution. Masters also 
enlisted slaves to serve in the 
war with the promise that they 
would receive their freedom. 

Some African Americans 
supported the Patriots while 
others joined the Loyalists. 
Both sides promised them 
freedom. Tens of thousands 
of African Americans were 
looking for a means to extricate 
themselves from slavery no 
matter vi^hich side they took, 

and thousands of them were 

Northern states began 
the process of gradual 
emancipation during the 
Revolutionary War era. 
Though Vermont would 
not officially be a state until 
1791, the legislature there 


prohibited slavery in 1 777 . 
Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, 
Ne^v Hampshire, Connecticut, 
Rhode Island, New York and 
New Jersey soon followed. 
Slaves in Massachusetts were 
all freed through judicial acts 
by 1783, but most of the other 
states passed gradual abolition 
laws. The Pennsylvania 
Society for the Relief of Free 
Negroes Unlawfully Held in 
Bondage, founded in 1 775, 
pressed for abolition. The 
Quakers in Pennsylvania 
formed the vanguard against 
slavery as did Methodists, 
Presbyterians and Unitarians 
among others in other states 
(see Figure 1). 

In 1780 the Pennsylvania 
legislature passed An Act 
for the Gradual Abolition of 
Slavery. Anticipating their 
freedom from Great Britain, 
the legislators wrote in the 
preamble to the act that they 
rejoiced "to extend a portion 
of that freedom to others, 
which has been extended to 

us; and a release from that 
state of thraldom [slavery] 
to which we ourselves were 
tyrannically doomed...." 
Section 1 of the act explained 
their motivations. It stated that 
Richard Allen, co-founder of 
the Philadelphia Free African 
Society in 1787 and first bishop 
of the African Methodist 
Episcopal Zion Church hailed 
the Pennsylvania abolition 
society as "the friend of those 
Avho hath no helper" because 
they used "such means that are 
in their power to extend the 
blessings of freedom to every 
part of the human race." 
In states that did not 
abolish slavery, some African 
Americans -were emancipated 
by reason of diligent -work, 
good conduct, familial 
connections, or commendable 
service. Methods for securing 
freedom from bondage 
included court actions, -wills, 
and self-purchase. Free and 
enslaved African Americans 
in those years from the 

formation of the Union until 
the Civil War were quite 
outspoken about the injustice 
of slavery and the institution's 
inconsistency -with America's 
founding documents. A fe-w 
African American patriots were 
able to leave written documents 
relating to their longings for 

Phillis Wheatley, the 
enslaved Boston poetess, in her 
1 77^ letter and poem to George 
Washington dared not call out 
for justice for herself or her 
people, but she certainly made 
it clear that she understood 
America's revolutionary goals. 
In 1776 when she -wrote to 
General Washington, who she 
calls "Generalissimo of the 
armies of North America," she 
made it clear that Washington 
-was leading the army for "the 
land of freedom's heaven- 
defended race." Three 
years earlier, in 1773, -when 
Wheatley 's volume, Poenu on 
Varioiu Subject, -was published, 
she, in her tribute to the Earl of 


Dartmouth, spoke of her own 
"love of freedom" and hatred of 
"tyranic sway": 

ShoiiQ you, my lord, while you 
peruke my ,iong. 
Wonder from whence my love of 
Freedom sprung, 
Whence flow the^e wLihe^f, for the 
common good, 
By feeling hearU alone be^t 

I, young in life, by seeming 
cruel fate 

Was snatch'd from Afric's 
fancy'd happy seat .... ' 

Three years after the Treaty 
of Pans formally ended the 
Revolution, New York-based 
African American poet, Jupiter 
Hammon, the nation's first 
African American published 
writer, also spoke of freedom. 
In his published remarks "To 
the Members of the African 
Society of the City of New 
York," 1786, he asserted: 

"That liberty is a great thing 
we may know from our own 

feelings, and we may likewise 
judge so from the conduct of 
the white-people, in the late 
war. How much money has 
been spent, and how many lives 
have been lost, to defend their 
liberty. I must say that I have 
hoped that God would open 
their eyes, when they were so 
much engaged for liberty, to 
think of the state of the poor 
blacks, and to pity us. He 
has done it in some measure, 
and has raised us up many 
friends ...." 

In the fifty years after the 
Revolution, abolitionists in 
the northern states united to 
form numerous antislavery 
societies. These groups sent 
petitions with thousands 
of signatures to Congress, 
held abolition meetings and 
conferences, wrote songs, 
boycotted products made with 
slave labor, printed mountains 
of literature, gave innumerable 
speeches for their cause and 
sometimes advocated violent 
means to bring the "peculiar 

institution" (slavery) to an end. 
They also aided and abetted 
runaway slaves. There is little 
specific information about the 
number of runa^vays during 
two centuries of slavery. There 
were thousands of runaways 
living in northern cities and 
Canada during the antebellum 
years. Enslaved blacks and 
their white sympathizers 
planned secret flight strategies 
and escape routes for 
runaways to make their way 
to freedom. Although it was 
neither subterranean nor a 
mechanized means of travel, 
this network of routes and 
hiding places soon came to be 
kno^vn as the Underground 
Railroad. Some free blacks 
partnered ^vith the whites that 
-were active "conductors" on 
the Underground Railroad, 
while others simply harbored 
runaways in their homes. 
Underground Railroad routes 
-were on land and sea and could 
be found in almost every region 
of the United States, although 


the most used routes were in 
the JMid- Atlantic, Northeastern 
and Midwestern states and 
territories (see Figure 2). 

Abolitionist and statesman 
Frederick Douglass escaped 
from slavery when he left 
Baltimore, Maryland, by train 
in 1838 wearing a sailor's 
uniform and using a forged 
seaman's pass. He traveled to 
Philadelphia and was aided 
by abolitionists in his flight to 
New York and settlement in 
New Bedford, Massachusetts. 
Harriet Jacobs, author of 
IiicideiiLi in the Life of a Slave 
Girl, escaped by ship in 1842 
with the aid of the captain 
and crew to Philadelphia and 
from there by rail to New 
York in search of her children 
and other members of her 
family. She often traveled by 
rail between New York City 
and Boston with her employer. 
Beginning in 1849, Jacobs 
worked in the Rochester, Ne^v 
York, Antislavery Office and 
Reading Room. There she met 

Frederick Douglass, Amy Post 
and other abolitionists. 

Other examples of daring 
escapes abound. A husband 
and wife team, William and 
Ellen Craft, gained great 
celebrity for their Christmas 
escape in 1848. Ellen, who was 
very light, disguised herself 
as a man, and her husband, 
William, who had a brown 
complexion, pretended to be 
her slave. They traveled by rail 
and ship to Philadelphia and 
appeared at the "Underground 
Railroad office " of William 
Still, safe and sound. They 
moved on to Boston where 
they were assisted by 
abolitionists such as William 
Lloyd Garrison, Theodore 
Parker, William Wells Brown 
and the Boston Vigilance 
Committee (see pp. 80-1). Not 
all runa^vay experiences were 
successful or thrilling, but all 
were courageous. An enslaved 
tobacco factory worker named 
Henry "Box " Brown made one 
of the most ingenious escapes. 

He got his nickname "Box" 
when he mailed himself from 
Richmond, Virginia, to the 
Philadelphia Antislavery office 
in 1849." 

In 1850 the United States 
Congress passed the Fugitive 
Slave Act making the penalties 
more severe for those who 
aided runaways. As a result 
many fugitives living in 
northern cities moved to 
Canada. Yet, the number 
of runaways from the South 
did not cease; they just had 
farther to go. Underground 
Railroad "conductors" were 
willing to help them, and 
abolitionists in Canada were 
willing to aid them in their new 
homes. Underground Railroad 
conductor Harriet Tubman, 
who claimed to have led over 
300 slaves out of Maryland, in 
fact, did not begin her work 
until 1850.'' 

Fugitive slave, Anthony 
Burns, was able to escape from 
Virginia to Boston by stowing 
away on a ship. His arrest and 






FIGURE 2» Detail from Earl McElfresh's Freedoin'j TracLi: AMap of the Underground Railroad 
(Olean, NY, 2005), sho-wing reported Underground Railroad routes in New England (see pp. 76-7). 



FIGURE 3* Detail from broadside, John Andrews, Anthony Buriu 

(Boston, 1855), showing the arrest of fugitive slave Anthony Burns in Boston (see pp. 80-1). 


trial in Boston under provisions 
of the Fugitive Slave Act of 
1850 incited riots and protests 
by black and white abolitionists 
and citizens of Boston in the 
spring of 1854. In an effort to 
free him from federal agents, 
Thomas Wentworth Higginson, 
a Unitarian minister who was 
also a militant abolitionist, 
led an attack on the Boston 
courthouse which resulted 
in the death of a deputy 
marshal. Bostonians offered 
to buy Burns' freedom, but the 
authorities refused and he was 
returned to his owner. Later, 
sympathizers were successful 
in pa3ring his master to free him 
(see Figure 3). 

In their quest for full 
political rights, free blacks also 
explored alternative solutions 
to gradual emancipation in 
the years before the Civil 
War. One example was 
Massachusetts -born Paul 
Cuffee, a free black man of 
central importance to the rise 
of the colonization movement. 

He became an active exponent 
of African colonization in 
general and of the Sierra 
Leone scheme in particular. 
The British established Sierra 
Leone as a settlement colony 
for freed blacks in 1787. Born 
in Massachusetts before the 
Revolutionary War, Cuffee was 
of mixed Native American and 
black parentage. As a youth he 
was able to get some education 
and then found work as a 
sailor, a shipyard laborer, and 
a shipbuilder. By 1780 he had 
built a ship of his own, and by 
1806 he owned one large ship, 
two brigs and some smaller 
vessels and was able to engage 
very profitably in trade. 

Even though his wealth 
continued to grow, as did 
the taxes he paid to the 
Massachusetts government, 
Cuffee could not vote and 
his children could not 
attend public schools. In 
defiance, Cuffee and his 
brother refused to pay their 
taxes. Subsequently, Cuffee 

financed a Quaker school that 
he opened not only to black 
children but also to all children 
in his community. Unable to 
interest anyone in financing 
his Sierra Leone colonization 
scheme, Cuffee decided to 
finance it himself. In 1815 
at a personal expenditure of 
$4,000, he took nine free black 
families totaling thirty- eight 
individuals to settle in Sierra 
Leone. Many free blacks as 
well as some whites received 
Cuffee s emigration plan with 

Soon after Cuffee 's venture, 
the American Colonization 
Society (ACS) was founded in 
Washington, DC in 1816. ACS 
established Liberia in West 
Africa as a settlement colony 
for freeborn and emancipated 
African Americans in 1822 (see 
Figure 4) . The 1 899 annual 
report of ACS stated that over 
21,000 emigrants had been sent 
out by the Society via almost 
200 separate expeditions at a 
cost of $3,100,000." ACS had 


a Massachusetts auxiliary, and 
its reports provide information 
about the state's emigrants. 
For example, six Massachusetts 
African American women 
emigrated to Liberia in 1857. 
One of the women, Mary 
Jane Triplett, was the sister 
of a Massachusetts physician. 
Dr. I.H. Sno^vden, who had 
sailed to Liberia in 1854. He 
returned in 1855 for some of 
his family members. Triplett 
also traveled with a single 
woman and daughter of a 
deceased friend as ^vell as 
"a highly educated young 
lady from Templeton, " 

However, the vast majority 
of African Americans were 
absolutely opposed to 
colonization in Africa. When 
President Abraham Lincoln 
proposed colonization for 
newly freed slaves, many 
blacks were offended and 
unwilling to consider such 
a venture. Of the 500 who 
were colonized in Haiti during 


the Lincoln administration, about 
350 returned to the United States. 
Interestingly, after the Civil War the 
ACS received many inquiries from 
blacks vv^illing to emigrate to Liberia, 
but the society did not have funds to 
assist them. 

Still, most African Americans 
^vanted to fight for freedom and 
justice in the United States. At the 
end of the Civil War, millions of 
prayers for abolition were finally 
answ^ered vv^ith the ratification 
of the Thirteenth Amendment in 
December 1865: 

Neither jlai^ery nor 
ini^oUmtaiy deri^itude^ 
except as a punuhment 
for crime whereof the 
party shall have been 
duly coni^lcted^ shall exist 
within the United States or 
any place subject to their 


1. The Emancipation Proclamation 
states that, " All persons held as slaves 
within any state... the people whereof 
shall then be in rebellion against 

the United States, shall be then, 
thenceforw^ard and forever free...." 
come/documents/full- text/ 

2. The Abraham Lincoln Papers 
at the Library of Congress, http// 
malhome.html. Accessed November 

3. See Benjamin Quarles, Ncijro in 
ihi' Ainencan Rei'oliilLon (Chapel Hill: 
University ot North Carolina Press, 
1996); Sylvia Frey, Water from the 
Rock: Black Rcjuitance In a Rd'oliitLonaiy 
Aijc (Princeton: Princeton University 
Press, 1991); Leon Litwack, Norli3 

of SLwery: the Neijro in the Free Slatej, 
1790-1860 (Chicago: University of 
Chicago Press, 1961); and Darlene 
Clark Hine and William C. Hine, 
Stanley Harrold, The African American 
OdyMcy, 4th ed. (Upper Saddle 
River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 
2008). For a further discussion 
of sources and maps, see Debra 
Newman Ham, editor, The African 
American Mosaic: A Library of Congrejj 
Rejoaree Guide for the Study of Black 
Hutoiy and Culture (Washington, DC: 
Library of Congress, 1993) and a 
related exhibit, Debra Newman Ham, 
curator. The African American Odyjjey: for Full Citizenjhip, 1 998 
at http://lcw^eb2. 
aaohtml/ Accessed November 23, 

4. Ibid. 

5. Pennsylvania Legacies, November 
2005, pp. 6-7. 

6. http://w^wAv. 
index_hd.html. Accessed November 

index_hd.html. Accessed November 

8. http://w^ww. 
jupiter_hammond.html. Accessed 
November 20, 2010. 

9. Benjamin Quarles, Black 
Abolitionuifj (New^ York: Da Capo 
Press, 1991) and William Still, The 
Underground Riiilroad (New^ York: 
Arno Press, 1968). See also http://, "National 
Underground Railroad Netw^ork to 
Freedom." Accessed January 24, 

10. John Hope Franklin and Albert 
A. Moss, Jr., From SLwery to Freedom. 
Fighth ed. New York: Knopf, 2004. 

11. Ibid. 

12. See William Still and Franklin 
and Moss. 

13. Adelaide Cromw^ell Hill and 
Martin Kilson, editors, Apropoj of 
Africa (New York: Doubleday, 1970), 
pp. 23-24; Lorenzo J. Greene, The 
Negro in Colonial New Fngland (New^ 
York: Anthenum, 1971); Sheldon H. 
Harris, Paul Cuffe, Black American and 
the African Return (Ne^v York: Simon 
and Schuster, 1972); Henry Noble 
Sherw^ood, "Early Negro- Deportation 
Projects," The MuiJLkiippi Valley 
Hi.itorical Rci'icw 2 (March 1916): 484- 
508; and Henry Noble Shervi^ood, 
"Paul Cutfee," Journal of Negro Hutoiy, 
8 (April 1923): 153-229. 

14. Ibid. 

15. See ACS Annual Reports, 
1819-1910, 1-91 (Reprint, New 
York: Negro Universities Press, 
1969). Note: The page numbers 
in the reports are not numbered 
consecutively. Each annual report 
begins with page one. See especially 
the reports for 1860-99. 

16. Thirteenth Ma.-iciachujettj 
Colonization Society Annual Report, 
1854, pp. 13-14; Sixteenth 
Massachusetts Colonization Society 
Annual Report, 1857, pp. 7-8. 

Accessed November 18, 2010. 

FIGURE 4* Detail from W. McLain, Map of Liberia, compiled from data on file in the Office of the 
American Colonization Society (Baltimore, 1845), showing the Maryland in Liberia colony and inset of 
Monrovia, Liberia's capital (see pp. 78-9). 


Cotton, Sla<^eiy, and the Strength of the Rebellion 

BY SUSAN SCHULTEN • University of Denver 

The Civil War left us an abundance of maps. The four years of 
armed conflict generated countless military and strategic maps 
detailing the topography of the war theaters, not to mention the 
post-mortem cartographic reflections on battles lost and won. 
The crisis also coincided w^ith a period of great inventiveness 
that expanded the domain of mapping beyond geographic 
landscapes to statistical and thematic information. This boom in 
creativity was aided by the advent of lithography in the 1850s, 
which made mapmaking both quicker and cheaper. 

By the 1850s, maps began 
to mark patterns in rainfall 
and temperature, as -well as 
the distribution of disease. 
At the same time, the U.S. 
Census grew in size and scope, 
producing a large body of 
population data. Europeans 
had been experimenting viath 

population maps as early as 
the 1830s, and by the 1850s 
the German mapmaker August 
Petermann actually began to 

The political crisis deepened 
significantly through the 1850s, 
especially after the passage 
of the Kansas-Nebraska Act 
in 1854 raised the possibility 

translate American census data 

into cartographic form. But the of extending slavery into 

sectional crisis also stimulated the West. The Act sparked 

tremendous cartographic enormous opposition to slavery 

innovation in the U.S. in the northern states, which 


v * 

. 5-*^' 











FIGURE 5 • Detail from G. W. Elliott, Map of the United Stated, showing by coloiv, the Area of Freedom and Slaiv/y 
(NewYork, 1856) ,h ighlightingt hes ectionald ivisionsof t hec ountry( seep p. 82- 3). 

coalesced into the Republican 
Party, dedicated to ending 
the spread of slavery into the 
territories. This upheaval 
regarding the fate of the West 
generated a number of political 

maps in the northern states 
from 1854 to 1856, many of 
which drew data directly from 
the Seventh Census to make 
a pointed case against slavery 
and the injustice and inequality 

it created. These maps were 
particularly popular during 
the campaign of 1856, when 
John C. Fremont ran as the 
first Republican candidate for 
President. Several campaign 


posters, disguised as maps, 
circulated that summer and fall, 
all of which exposed Americans 
to the geography of slavery. 
Consider the "Map of the 
United States, showing by 
colors the area of freedom and 
slavery, and the territories 
whose destiny is yet to be 
decided." Designed as a map 
of the nation, it is actually a 
studied case against slavery. 
The map, like so many 
others at the time, makes a 
clear distinction between 
the North and the South, 
with most of the West left 
undetermined in a third color 
(see Figure 5). Slave states are 
represented as homogenous and 
undifferentiated, a "solid south" 
acting as an obstacle to freedom 
and civilization. The black 
Missouri Compromise line 
cleaves the nation in two and 
serves as a pointed reminder 
that the Kansas-Nebraska Act 





-f^ — 


" f 

repealed the Compromise and 
opened northern territories 
to slavery through "popular 

Across the lower part of 
the map are several tables 
comparing the states and their 
newspaper circulation, schools, 
internal improvements, miles 
of railroad, and postal costs. 
The map conveys the decidedly 
unequal distribution of power 
and resources between the 
North and the South, and 
poses the question of the 

West in rather stark terms. 
While northern states held the 
superiority of infrastructure 
and economic strength, the 
map uses statistics to show 
that southern states held 
proportionally more political 
power. Figures from the census 
and the election of 1852 show 
that the South 's comparatively 
smaller population gave 
each southerner more 
representation in the Senate. 
Similarly, a Constitutional 
compromise enlarged southern 

FIGURE 6* Frederick Law Olmsted, "A Map of the Cotton Kingdom and its Dependencies, " in his Thi; Cotton Klngdoin 
(New York, 1861). Reproduction courtesy Rare Book Department, Boston Public Library. 



fi. lA* -^i* 

' •^•'■^ipI' J 



if, J. mjtmi^ 

Congressional representation 
by three-fifths of the slave 
population, which augmented 
the power of slaveholders and 
gave them a distinct advantage 
over their northern non- 
slaveholding counterparts. 
With such unequal 
representation, southern 
interests had the power to open 
the West to slavery, and the 
map powerfully conveys that 
sense of injustice. 

By 1860 Americans had been 
exposed to several maps of 


this type that distinguished 
slave and free states but did 
not profile the distribution of 
slavery. Similarly, Americans 
had seen many maps that 
drew on the 1850 census data, 
though none actually integrated 
those statistics into the map 
itself. When Lincoln became 
the sixteenth president of the 
United States (with no electoral 
support from slave states). 
South Carolinians rejected the 
results and began the process of 
separating their state from the 

Union. By April of 1861, ten 
other states had followed suit, 
constituting the Confederate 
States of America. 

Like the Kansas-Nebraska 
Act, the secession crisis 
generated several maps. 
Frederick La-w Olmsted, best 
known as one of the designers 
of Central Park, was among the 
first Americans who attempted 
to map the production of 
cotton in the American South. 
Throughout the 1850s, Olmsted 
had traveled through the South, 
sending his dispatches back to 
northern audiences. After the 
secession of South Carolina, 
Olmsted decided to reissue his 
observations in a single volume, 
T/pe Cotton Kingdom, a decision 
made in part to dissuade the 
British from recognizing the 
Confederacy as a sovereign 
entity. He hired abolitionist 
Daniel Goodloe to assist him 
with the project, and the two 

FIGURE 7 • Detail from Edward Atkinson, The Cotton Kingdom (Boston, 1863), 
outlining the cotton producing regions in the southern states (see pp. 68-9). 


worked furiously through the 
early months of 1861 to revise 
the manuscript for publication. 
Though Olmsted was not an 
abolitionist, the two shared an 
interest in statistics, and their 
critique, largely the economic 
rather than the humanitarian 
argument, against slavery. To 
make this case in a visual way, 
they compiled a map to assess 
the efficiency of slave labor, 
(see Figure 6). 

Soon after the crisis at 
Fort Sumter, the British 
acknowledged the rebellion, but 
stopped short of recognizing 
the Confederacy as a sovereign 
entity. In such a context, 
Olmsted's task became even 
more urgent. Because the 
1860 Census figures were still 
difficult to obtain, Olmsted 
relied on data from the prior 
Census, and estimated a 25% 
increase in the slave population. 
In the U.S. edition of the map 
reproduced here, Olmsted 
included two measurements: 
the density of slave labor 

and the output of cotton. He 
separated out areas ^vhere 
slaves outnumbered free men, 
as well as those -where slave 
labor was relatively weak. 
He identified cotton regions 
of high, moderate, and low 
output. By incorporating 
these two factors on the map, 
he shre^vdly left the reader to 
draw the conclusion that those 
areas most dependent upon 
slave labor were not necessarily 
the most productive cotton 
regions. In short, he argued, 
slavery was an inefficient labor 
system, and the British would 
be -wise to withhold support for 
the Confederacy. His ironic 
title turned James Heniy 
Hammond's declaration — 
"Cotton is King"— upside 
down. Instead, he insisted, the 
South was a place of poverty, 
imprisoned by an institution 
that created "dependencies" 
^vhile generating little 
prosperity for the region 
as a w^hole. 

Like Olmsted, Edward 

Atkinson believed slavery to 
be fundamentally inefficient. 
Atkinson was an agent and 
treasurer for several Boston 
area cotton mills, which made 
him intimately familiar with 
the production and trade 
of cotton. His abolitionist 
record extended back into 
the early 1850s, and he firmly 
believed that the inefficiency 
of slave labor gave it no future 
in America. Yet as the war 
continued into 1862, Atkinson 
worried about the possibility 
of European recognition of the 
Confederacy. He was equally 
concerned by the reluctance of 
his peers and fellow capitalists 
to support emancipation, for 
many of them believed slavery 
was the only way to profitably 
cultivate cotton. 

After President Lincoln 
issued the Emancipation 
Proclamation in September 
1862, Atkinson turned to 
cartography to make his 
case against slavery (see 
Figure 7). His map reflects 


several recent innovations in 
cartography. Notice his use 
of population and cotton data 
from the Census, of average 
seasonal temperature lines 
taken from the maps of Lorin 
Blodget, and other data from 
John Mallet's 1862 study of 
cotton cultivation. Atkinson 
integrated all this information 
onto the map in order to 
discern that cotton, if carefully 
cultivated, could become more 
wadely and efficiently grown 
by free rather than by slave 
labor. Like Olmsted before 
him, Atkinson used the map to 
demonstrate that the strength 
of southern cotton and slavery 
had been greatly overstated. 
Only two percent of the South 's 
land, he discovered, was 
actually devoted to cultivating 
that crop. 

Perhaps the most innovative 
attempt to map slavery 
during the sectional crisis 

came from what might seem 
an unlikely source, the U.S. 
Coast Survey. The Coast 
Survey was the most important 
Federal scientific agency in 
the antebellum period. It 
produced an enormous number 
of maps and charts under 

the leadership of Alexander 
Dallas Bache, grandson of 
Benjamin Franklin and one 
of the most respected of the 
nation's scientists. In 1861, as 
states in the lower south began 
to secede from the Union, 
the Survey began to actively 


FIGURE 8 • Ed'win Hergesheimer, Map of Virginia Showing the DLttrihiition of itj Slave Population from the Cenjuj of 1860 
(Washington, DC, 1861). Reproduction courtesy Geography and Map Division, Library of Congress. 


compile its data regarding the 
nation's coasts and waterways 
in order to prepare for the 
possibility of war. Bache was 
deeply involved with these 
preparations, and helped to 
design a number of charts 
that would facilitate a naval 
blockade of the Confederacy 
during the summer of 1861. In 
the midst of this urgent work, 
the agency also created a map 
profiling the density of the 
slave population in Virginia, 
using the latest data from the 
Eighth Census begun in 1860 
by Superintendent Joseph C. 
G. Kennedy (see Figure 8). 

Printed by the commercial 
lithographer Henry Graham, 
the map directly ranked and 
shaded each county according 
to the percentage of its 
population enslaved. The 
result was a stark visual image 
of a lopsided state, where 
western counties depended 
little on an institution that 
was crucial to their eastern 
counterparts. Curiously, the 

map does not identify the 
Coast Survey as its author, 
but several clues identify 
that agency, including the 
name of one of its most 
respected draughtsman Edwin 
Hergesheimer. The fact that 
the Survey even produced 
this new and unusual map 
of population geography is 
suggestive, for it does not 
resemble the agency's other 
charts and maps. The map 
does not identify topography, 
railroads, or other elements 
that might deem it relevant for 

The Coast Survey probably 
prepared the map in early 
1861, which connects it closely 
to the debate over secession 
in Virginia. In February, 
Virginians defeated a secession 
proposal, indicating the 
deep division of interests 
and loyalties within that 
state. Census Bureau Chief 
J.C.G. Kennedy was aware 
of Unionist sentiment in the 
western counties, and actively 

used his office to foment 
opposition to secession. He 
supported the Coast Survey's 
efforts here, for the map made 
the uneven distribution of 
slaves undeniable. In April, 
after the crisis at Fort Sumter, 
President Lincoln called up 
75,000 volunteers, which 
in turn prompted Virginia 
voters to narrowly approve 
a secession measure. Just 
days later George McClellan 
invaded western Virginia, 
securing the region that would 
eventually become the state of 
West Virginia. 

Thus the map of Virginia 
might have been designed to 
foment Unionist sentiment 
in that state. When the map 
was reissued in September 
it included "Kanawha" over 
the western half of Virginia, 
which was one of the original 
names for the proposed new 
state. Bache himself might 
have designed the map, for he 
was an outspoken supporter 
of the Union cause who later 


if ^ 

Of coLirde^ the map cannot explain Lincoln ^^ complex 
motii^ed for emancipation^ but it allowed him to think about 
the war in a way that topographic mapd did not. 

FIGURE 9* Francis Bicknell Carpenter, Find t Reading of the Emancipation Proclamation of Prejident Lincoln 
(oil on canvas, 1864). Reproduction courtesy U.S. Senate Collection. 


became Vice-President of 
the United States Sanitary 
Commission, the ambitious 
organization responsible for 
mobikzing the northern home 
front and providing support 
for troops during the war. As 
further evidence of Bache's 
involvement with the map, the 
Sanitary Commission's slogan, 
"For the benefit of the sick 
and wounded soldiers," was 
emblazoned across the top of 
the Coast Survey's second map 
of slavery. 

This second map, issued 
in September 1861, covered 
the southern states as a whole 
and was drawn on a scale 
of forty-seven miles to the 
inch (see pp. 72-3). Like the 
map of Virginia, it illustrated 
the different interests of 
Southerners by marking the 
uneven geographic distribution 
of slavery. Conversely, the 
map also suggests that areas 
without slavery might become 
relative sources of Unionist 
loyalty, a hope that Lincoln 

expressed several times during 
the secession crisis and the first 
year of the conflict. Indeed, 
the map implicitly suggests 
that slavery is the cause of 
the rebellion. The table at the 
bottom of the map, measuring 
the relationship of slavery 
to the population as a whole 
in each state, corresponded 
closely to the order in which 
the southern states left the 

The map was copied in 
several forms, which suggests 
that it was well received in 
a population that closely 
followed the progress of 
the war. To contemporary 
viewers, the map implicitly 
connected the strength of 
the rebellion with slavery, 
and may have encouraged 
discussion of emancipation as 
in instrument of war as well 
as a moral ideal and a political 
goal. In September 1862, 
Lincoln formally issued the 
Emancipation Proclamation, 
and though the policy had 

clear limitations, it undeniably 
transformed the meaning of 
the war. Lincoln still insisted 
that his responsibility was 
to preserve the Union, but a 
reconstituted Union would 
ultimately be one without 

Among those deeply moved 
by the Proclamation was 
Francis Bicknell Carpenter, an 
artist who had painted several 
of the nation's presidents and 
leaders. Carpenter hoped 
to memorialize Lincoln's 
Proclamation as a moment 
of great moral courage, and 
through social connections 
secured the President's 
permission to capture this 
on canvas. Carpenter came 
to live in the White House 
in early 1864, and spent six 
months studjring the men 
who would be included in 
the portrait so that it might 
accurately reproduce the scene 
of Lincoln's announcement 
of the emancipation policy to 
his cabinet (see Figure 9). 


Carpenter carefully arranged 
the cabinet according to 
sentiment about emancipation, 
and paid close attention to 
the setting itself: a copy of the 
anti-slavery A^(?«' York Tribune 
lies at the feet of Secretary of 
War Edwin Stanton, while the 
Coast Survey's 1863 "Map of 
the State of Virginia " covers 
the table behind Secretary 
of State William Seward. 
Moreover, when Carpenter 
found the Presrdent poring 
over the Coast Survey's map 
of slavery ^ — ^on more than 
one occasion — he decided to 
rnclude rt rn the lower rrght 
corner of the parntrng. 

Why was Lincoln drawn 
to the map? We know from 
Carpenter's memorr that the 
President used the map to 
observe the progress of the 
military. Whrle he had many 
maps at his disposal that 
detailed several theaters of 
war, only this map allowed 
him to think strategically 
about the destruction of 

slavery— the Confederacy's 
greatest economic asset— as 
a military goal. Of course, 
the map cannot explain 
Lrncoln's complex motives for 
emancipation, but it allowed 
hrm to thrnk about the war 
in a way that topographic 
maps did not. Perhaps it 
should not surprise us, then, 
that the Presrdent admrred 
Carpenter's finished portrait, 
and singled out the map of 
slavery as one of its notable 
details. Lincoln may or 
may not have been aware 
that it was a groundbreaking 
cartographic achievement, 
but he clearly understood its 
unique power to showcase 
the military as an army of 
liberation. For these reasons, 
the map rs an exceedingly rrch 
resource for understandrng 
not only the most important 
and consequential conflict 
rn American history but the 
power of maps to shape public 
opinion and— ultimately— a 
new national destiny. •^ 


1. Susan Schulten, "The 
Cartography ot Slavery and the 
Authority ot Statistics," Cwil 
WarHutory 56 (March 2010): 
5-32; Herman Friis, "Statistical 
Cartography in the United States 
prior to 1870 and the Role of Joseph 
C.G. Kennedy and the U.S. Census 
Otfice," The Ainencaii Cartographer 1 
(1974): 131-67. 

2. Frederick Law Olmsted, 
The Cotton Kingdom: a Travellers 
Observations on Cotton and Slavery ui 
the American Slave States (New York: 
Mason Brothers, 1861). 

3. Cheap Cotton by Free Labor, by a 
Cotton /Manufacturer (Boston: A. 
Williams & Co., 1861). 

4. Edward Atkinson, 7?(y7flr^ ^(7 ^,^5 
Boston Board of Trade on the Cotton 
zManafaclure of 1862 (Boston, 1863). 

5. Daniel Crofts, Reluctant 
Confederates: Upper South Untomsts 
in the Secession Crtsui (Chapel Hill: 
University of North Carolina Press, 
1989), pp. 142-143. 

6. Richard Orr Curry, A House 
Divided: a Study of Statehood Politics 
and the Copperhead Movement in West 
Virginia (Pittsburgh: University of 
Pittsburgh Press, 1964), pp. 7-8 
and 68. 

7. Francis Bicknell Carpenter, 
SLxMonttis at the \Fhite House with 
Abraham Lincoln: the Story of a Picture_ 
(New York: Hurd and Houghton, 
1866), p. 25. 

8. Carpenter, Suv Alontfjs at tf^e White 
House, p. 353. 


Cii^it WarMapti in the Popular Media 

BY DAVID BOSSE • Librarian & Curator of Maps, Historic Deerfield 

On the morning of August 30, 1862, George Templeton Strong, 
a New York City lawyer, apprehensively scanned several local 
dailies for news of a major engagement in Virginia. The second 
battle of Manassas, or Bull Run, had begun the previous day, 
and preliminary reports had been vague and conflicting. As 
he noted in his diary, the next day's headlines confirmed his 
worst fears. "The morning papers were not cheerful. We were 
out-generalled and out flanked. Washington in danger again, 
everything bungled and botched. ' 

Many of Strong's fellow 
citizens also looked to the press 
to keep abreast of military 
developments. Northern 
newspaper readers— who 
numbered in the hundreds of 
thousands — ^had an intense 
desire to know what had 
happened at some remote 

crossroads in Virginia. This 
abiding interest in news from 
the front lines was chronicled 
in a florid report filed on July 
13, 1861, by 3^ New York Tribune 
correspondent: "Millions of men 
and women, fathers, mothers, 
children, wives, sweethearts 
who have sent those dearer 

than life to this war look every 
day at this journal, and at other 
journals, with eyes brimful 
of anxious tears and turn 
these pages with hands made 
unsteady by emotion." 
Of course southern 
readers equally shared this 
concern, and just as eagerly 


sought news of the war. But 
unhke in the North, the war 
had a devastating effect on 
Confederate newspapers. 
Those that survived had few 
resources to print maps 
(see Figure 10). 


A series of advances in 

communication and printing 
technologies enabled 
newspaperst om eett he 
constantd emandf ort he 
latestn ews.T hee xpansion 
ofr ailroada ndt elegraph 
networksp riort ot hewa r 
no-wm eantt hatr eportsf rom 
distantl ocaleswe rer eceived 
ina f ractionof t het imei t 
previouslyh adt akenf orm ail 

toa rrive.T hed evelopment 
ofd urablep rintingp latest hat 
coulde asilyb er eplicateda nd 
useds imultaneouslyon m ore 
than one press significantly 
reducedt het imer equired 
fort jrpesetting. A nds team- 
po^veredr otaryp ressesc ould 
nowp rintu pt ot end ifferent 
pagesa ndp roducea sm anya s 
20,000i mpressionsi na nh our. 
To scoop t hec ompetition 
andt herebyi ncrease 
readership,n ewspapersf rom 
Bostont oS t.L ouisa dded 
ware orrespondentst ot heir 
payrolls. N owherew ast his 
trendm orep ronouncedt han 
inN ewY orkC ity,h omet o 
eighteend ailyp apersa nd 
numerousp enodicalsd uring 
thew ar.R ivalriesb etween 
outspokene ditorsw ith 
differingp oliticalp ersuasions 
fueledt hee xpenditureof 
unprecedenteds umsof m oney 
toe xpandt heirc overageof 

FIGURE 10 'A map of the first battle of Manassas, one of only a few maps published in Richmond, -was republished 
int he New York Herald, Septemberl6,1861( seep p. 110- 11). 


the war. The New York Herald 
alone spent upwards of three- 
quarters of a million dollars 
on covering the war, far in 
excess of any other paper. 
Correspondents, or "Specials," 
accounted for much of these 
record-setting costs. Nearly 
350 war correspondents 
operated in all theaters of 
the conflict, documenting the 
actions of Union forces (see 
Figures 11 & 12). 

In addition to these 
extraordinary efforts to 
obtain the news first, the 
press turned to graphics 
as a way to bring the war 
home to readers and increase 
circulation. Prior to the war, 
publications such as Harper'^ 
Weekly, Frank Leslie ^ Illustrated 
Newspaper, and the New York 

Illiutrated New<i had pioneered 
the use of illustrations as a 
compelling, visual complement 
to written reporting. Once 
the war broke out, these 
publications increased the use 
of illustrations bringing images 
of combat and soldiers' life 
at the front to news-hungry 
readers. Harper[i axvA Le<ilie't> 
each maintained as many as 
a dozen artists in the field to 
pictorially record events. Over 
the course of the conflict, they 
published more than 5,000 
drawings. These illustrated 
reports greatly influenced the 
public's perception of the war 
in the North. 


For northern readers, most 
of the war took place over 
an enormous, and largely 
unfamiliar, geographical 
landscape. As a result, maps 
became a highly valued 
reference. An advertisement 
in the New York Herald of 
November 7, 1861 asked. 

"Where is Bull's Bay? Where 
is Port Royal?" and suggested 
that readers buy a copy of 
"Lloyd's Great Steel Plate 
Military Map of the Southern 
States" in order to find out. 
Ne^vspaper reports often 
included phrases such as "a 
glance at a map will show ..." 
or "take up your map to see ..." 
recognizing that readers had 
access to maps. Northern 
publishers exploited this 
market by issuing a multitude 
of sheet maps that depicted 
battles and the various theaters 
of war. Louis Prang & Co. 
of Boston even issued a War 
Telegram Marking Map that 
came with red and blue pencils 
to record troop movements and 
battles so that purchasers could 
conveniently track the war 
from home (see pp. 102-3). 

The rise in the production 
of commercial maps, however, 
was d^varfed by the number 
and variety of maps printed in 
newspapers. Between April 
1, 1861, and April 30, 1865, 


northern daily newspapers 
featured an aggregate of nearly 
2,100 maps ranging from large- 
scale plans of fortifications 
and battles to small-scale 
campaign and theater of 
war maps. Prior to the Civil 
War, maps rarely appeared in 
American newspapers; those 
that did tended to be small 
and diagrammatic. Once the 
conflict began, however, maps 
became fairly common; some 
newspapers even ran full-page 
maps — an innovation that put 
informative maps in the hands 
of readers, and encouraged 
cartographic literacy (see 
Figure 13). 

Among the daily 
newspapers. New York and 
Philadelphia publications 
produced the overwhelming 
majority of the war's 
journalistic maps. The 
Philadelphia Inquirer issued 
a statement of principles on 

August 1, 1861 including 
its vow to "furnish the most 
accurate dra-wings and sketches 
of fortifications, harbors, and 
military maps of all important 
points as it has already done to 
the gratification of the public. " 
Near the end of the war, the 
New York Herald looked back 
on its cartographic record and 
proclaimed on November 9, 
1864: "Military maps and plans 
of battles have no doubt been 
made, but they have usually 
been locked up in government 
archives and kept carefully 
from the public eye. Here, 
on the contrary, they have 
been promptly and minutely 
prepared for our columns, 
at our own expense, and our 
readers scarcely hear of a battle 
before it is made intelligible 
to them by carefully executed 
maps, prepared by or for our 
correspondents on the spot, 
and at once engraved and 

published in our columns. Our 
readers, if they have chosen 
to preserve them, have no-w 
the best atlas extant of those 
sections of the country which 
have been the scene of hostile 
encounters or curious strategy." 

Illustrated weeklies, such 
as Harper'tf, also included 
maps and bird's-eye views 
among their wide range of 
illustrations. In fact. Harper'^ 
printed more thematic and 
special purpose maps than 
any daily newspaper. The 
December 21, 1861, issue of 
Harper'^ announced its map of 
the proposed changes to the 
boundaries of Virginia and 

FIGURES 11 & 12« Details from Thomas Nast's, "The Press on the Field," published in Harpers Weekly, April 30, 1864, 
which highlights the role of correspondents in providing current information from the battlefront (see pp. 106-7). 


THE SiiAi ui' wAJi iiM liLiii WESV, 


i »Pt*-iHi tT*m 


* * 


■* ■ - ■ — 

iK a A, 

surrounding states, based on 
military control. "We continue 
in this number the series of 
war maps ^vhich have been so 
marked a feature of this journal 
since the war began." With few 
exceptions, maps printed in the 
illustrated weeklies portrayed 
the seat of war, wherever 
that might be, or other large 
regions, rather than detailed 
plans of military engagements. 


The demanding schedule 
of a daily newspaper trying to 
outpace its competition led to 
an assembly line approach to 
map production. The multi- 
step process, first developed by 
illustrated weeklies that often 
ran double-page engravings, 
involved cutting hardwood 
blocks to size, planing the 
engraving surface, and adding 
a layer of either chalk or 
^vhite enamel to receive the 

map or drawing. Working 
from a manuscript sketch (or 
a printed map) a draftsman 
copied the image onto tracing 
paper, and then transferred 
it onto the woodblock by 
placing the tracing paper face 
down and retracing it with a 
hard pencil. Less common 
methods involved drawing 
a map directly on the block 
in reverse, or attaching a 
correspondent's original sketch 
map to the woodblock face 
down, varnishing it so that 
the lines showed through, and 
engraving through the paper. 

Lacking art departments, 
daily papers contracted 
with local wood engraving 
or mapmaking firms. To 
speed up the process, the 
^voodblock -was divided into 
parts (an3rwhere from four to 
twenty-four, depending on the 
map's size), and distributed 
among a number of engravers. 

FIGURE 13 • "The Seat of the War, "appeared as a full page illustration in the New York HeraLd'j eight-page map 
supplement published September 16, 1861 (see ppT06-7). 


A master engraver provided 
quality control and corrected 
discrepancies between 
blocks. To effectively convey 
situational cartographic 
data to a diverse audience, 
journalistic maps practiced 
an economy of lines, symbols, 
and lettering. Not unlike road 
maps which emphasize some 
features (roads) at the expense 
of others (topography), news 
maps focused on pertinent 
details: troop positions and 
fortifications, the location 
of roads or railroads, and 
significant topographical 
features, such as rivers. 
Editors recognized a map's 
unique ability to clarify 
complex spatial relationships 
for their readers. A 
statement in the New York 
Herald o£ October 13, 1861, 
accompanjring a map depicting 
a skirmish in North Carolina, 
made this explicit: "We have 
heretofore given a graphic 
description of the unsuccessful 
attack . . . but the map which 

we publish today will give our 
readers a clearer understanding 
of the position of the respective 
combatants than the most 
minute -word picture could 
possibly afford." 

When initial news of 
military movements or 
battles reached editorial 
offices, newspapers turned to 
published cartographic sources 
from which they compiled their 
own small-scale locator maps. 
Papers also recycled maps that 
they had run in earlier issues. 
A reused map's content might 
be identical to its original 
printing, or reflect new facts. 
Once disassembled, sections 
of the woodblock could be 
engraved and substituted to 
update the map. A map could 
also be expanded through the 
addition of engraved blocks to 
include adjacent areas. The 
map's banner headline or title, 
another innovation of Civil 
War journalism, typically 
changed on a map's second or 
third use. Titles often spanned 

several newspaper columns, 
and signified a map's purpose. 
Thus, a general, small-scale 
map centered on the Upper 
Potomac River might be titled, 
"The Location of the Great 
Struggle, " in reference to 
the battle of Sharpsburg or 
Antietam (see pp. 108-9). 

Newspapers occasionally 
plagiarized each other's maps. 
St. Louis and Cincinnati 
newspapers copied battle 
maps that first appeared in 
New York or Philadelphia 
papers; the opposite occurred, 
particularly early in the war, 
w^hen eastern papers relied on 
other newspaper's maps that 
illustrated western campaigns. 
But not all derivative maps 
were a consequence of 
distance. On May 16, 1862, 
the New York Herald printed 
a letter that it had somehow 
obtained, -written by Sidney 
Ho-ward Gay, managing editor 
of the rival Tribune. Gay 
berated one of his reporters 
regarding a map of the battle 


of Lee's Mills, Virginia: "Your 
sketch of ye battle-ground of 
the 16th came just eight days 
after ye battle. Of course it 
was useless. The corn of ye 
Philadelphia Inquirer had sent 
one to that paper, which it 
had engraved and published, 
which I also had engraved & 
published, three days before 
yours reached me. I pray you 
remember ye Tribune is a daily 
newspaper— or meant to be 
— & not a historical record of 
past events." 


Northern newspaper maps 
drew upon a variety of sources 
for news: correspondents in 
the field, published maps, local 
informants, and occasionally 
Union officers. For the first 
two years of the war, few 
newspaper reports carried a 
by-line, and most maps did 
not identify their makers. 
But references to maps in 
news reports indicate that 
correspondents drew as many 

as one-third of all journalistic 
maps, and nearly all of the 
large-scale battle maps. 

A small number of maps 
can be attributed to officers 
in the field; more often, the 
military tried to suppress their 
publication. When the New 
York Tiine^ printed a map of 
Washington, DC and northern 
Virginia showing Union troop 
positions on December 4, 1861, 
Gen. George B. McClellan 
urged the Secretary of War 
to bring sanctions against the 
Tune^i for aiding the enemy. 
McClellan had more success 
during the siege of Yorktown 
when he had publication of 
Harper'^ Weekly temporarily 
suspended after it printed a 
plan of Union troop positions 
and headquarters. In a later 
incident, correspondent 
Thomas Knox described in the 
New York Herald of January 
18, 1863, how his report of the 
Union defeat at the battle of 
Chickasaw Bluffs, Mississippi, 
and "two elaborate maps. 

drawn with great care" had 
been confiscated by Gen. 
William T. Sherman's staff. 


The threat of censorship did 
not, however, deter the press. 
While newspapers attempted 
to be comprehensive in their 
reporting, the majority of the 
maps they printed represented 
military operations in the 
East. Two factors account 
for the concentration of 
cartographic coverage. The 
continual struggle to capture 
Richmond, the Confederate 
capitol, and the need to defend 
Washington made Virginia a 
major theater of war, and hence 
ne-wsworthy In addition, 
readers of newspapers such 
as the New York Herald and 
Philadelphia Inquirer, two of the 
most prolific sources of maps, 
had a particular interest in 
the activities of local and state 
regiments, many of which were 
deployed in the East. Despite 


this regional emphasis, virtually 
every significant military 
campaign was the subject 
of journalistic maps. Many 
obscure skirmishes were also 
charted, and in some cases these 
ne^vspaper maps are the only 
contemporary cartographic 
record of those engagements. 

Portra3ring the dynamic 
events of battles that involved 
dozens of military units 
engaged in combat across 
miles of terrain for many 
hours duration remains the 
greatest contribution of Civil 
War journalistic cartography. 
Correspondents faced 
enormous challenges as they 
^vitnessed the chaos of war, 
pieced together details from 
participants and onlookers, and 
hurriedly composed reports 
and maps that they sent — or 
took— to distant newspaper 
offices. While their work 
periodically suffered from 
insufficient information or 
hasty conclusions, it offered a 
^vindow on momentous events. 

Through a combination of 
symbols, directional signs, and 
text, newspaper maps depicted 
warfare ^vith greater or lesser 
degrees of success. What 
correspondents' maps may 
have lacked in cartographic 
precision, they often made up 
for in details regarding the 
action or the location not found 
elsewhere, such as where an 
officer was killed or the number 
of times a battery fired its 
cannon (see Figure 14). 

No other form of 
cartography matched the 
immediacy of journalistic 
maps. Within days of military 
movements or battles, readers 
could consult relevant maps 
for as little as two cents, the 
cost of a newspaper. This new 
source of visual information 
from the frontlines provided 
anxious readers at home with 
a fundamental understanding 
of the war's geographical 
dimension, and firmly 
established maps as a primary 
source of news. '^ 


Andre-ws, J. Cutler. The North 
ReporUt the Clvd War. Pittsburgh: 
University of Pittsburgh Press, 

Bosse, David, dv'd War Newspaper 
Mapd: A Huitoru-al Atlaj. Baltimore: 
Johns Hopkins University Press, 

Mott, Frank Luther. American 
Jotirnaluftn: A Huitvry ofNe\i\fpaper<i in 
the Uiutect Statej through the 260 Yean: 
1690-1950. New York: Macmlllan, 

Strong, George Templeton. llse 
Diaiy of George Templeton Strong. 
Edited by Alan Nevins and JVl.H. 
Thomas. New York: Macmillan, 

Thompson, William Fletcher, 
Jr. The Image of War: The Pu'toruil 
Reporting of tide American Civd War. 
New York: T. Yoseloff, [I960]. 


Would Terrain Map^ Have Made a Difference? 

BY RICHARD F. MILLER • Author oiHarvard'j Cini War: A History of the Twentieth McuMchMetU Volunteer Infantry (2005) 

In the dreary catalog of Civil War bloodlettings, the debacle at 
Balls Bluff, which occurred October 21, 1861, near Leesburg, 
Virginia, is often overshadowed by battles with greater 
casualties and higher stakes. While Balls Bluff lacked none 
of the drama of other battles, it is also a story of an avoidable 
tragedy. Unlike battles that were fought by design or from 
necessity, most historians agree that Balls Bluff was neither 
designed nor necessary. No territory was gained and no great 
principles were vindicated by its outcome. About 1,700 Union 
soldiers fought at Balls Bluff; of these, 553 were captured and 
perhaps 250 died. These casualties only confirmed ancient 
military wisdom ^ — ^ battles should not be fought with either cliffs 
or a river in the rear. At Balls Bluff, Union forces contended 
with both steep cliffs and a swift river.' 

FIGURE 1 4 • Detail from "Diagram of the Battle of Ball's Bluff, "TV^ic York Tinw, October 31, 1861 
(see pp. 108-9). 




^ w 


* VS^H^ 





4.+ * + 4- 

"Of. -%.- 


JO«T ^ -^^"^^ 


Union commanders' 
inexperience largely caused the 
disaster, and prominent among 
their errors was ignorance of 
local topography. The Battle 
of Balls Bluff is a good case 
study of the role of maps, or 
here, the absence of maps, on 
Civil War combat. Balls Bluff is 
also an early example of Union 
commanders' frequent failure 
to properly reconnoiter terrain, 
and the consequences of such 

Would the course of the battle 
and its outcome have differed if 
Union commanders had terrain 
maps in hand? The following 
deployment summary offers 
some clues. Various regiments' 
positions and critical actions that 
occurred during the battle are 
also summarized in the quickly- 
prepared map that appeared 
in several newspapers ten days 
after the battle (see Figure 14). 

In August 1861 recently 
appointed army commander 
Maj. Gen. George B. McClellan, 
ordered Brig. Gen. Charles 

P. Stone and his Corps of 
Observation to deploy along 
the Potomac River between 
the Point of Rocks and Seneca 
Mills. Stone's mission was 
defensive. Should the enemy 
attempt to cross the river, he 
was to "dispute the passage." 
However, McClellan did grant 
one exception. "Should you see 
the opportunity of capturing 
or dispersing any small party 
by crossing the river, " he 
allowed, "you are at liberty to 
do so, though great discretion is 
recommended in making such a 
movement. "^ 

The Balls Bluff saga began 
on October 20, 1861, when 
Stone ordered Col. Charles 
Devens, commander of the 
1 5th Massachusetts, to dispatch 
a reconnaissance patrol from 
Harrison Island to Balls Bluff, 
located in Virginia directly 
across the Potomac. After 
nightfall, 20 to 30 men crossed 
the river in two barges. Led 
by Capt. Chase Philbrick and 
O.M. Church Howe, their 

mission was to observe and 
report enemy activity around 
the important crossroads town 
of Leesburg, located about 1.5 
miles from the bluff. Landing at 
the bluff's base, they ascended a 
path and walked perhaps a mile 
inland. Near the Jackson house, 
they spotted ^vhat looked like 
a row of tents— a Confederate 
camp, they supposed. The 
patrol immediately returned 
to Harrison Island, and Howe 
was dispatched to Stone at 
Edwards Ferry to report his 
findings. This journey entailed 
descending the bluff, crossing 
the Potomac to Harrison Island, 
crossing the island, then crossing 
the Potomac to Maryland's 
mainland, and then traveling 
some three miles to Stone. 

After informing Stone, Howe 
returned to Harrison Island 
with ne-w orders. Devens was 
to re-cross the Potomac with 
five companies of his regiment, 
return to the Confederate 
camp, and destroy it; however, 
as McClellan had given Stone 


discretion to mount small 
raids, Stone now gave Devens 
discretion to remain in Virginia 
should he "see [a position] on 
the Virginia side, near the river, 
w^hich he can undoubtedly hold 
until reinforced, and one which 
can be successfully held against 
largely superior numbers." 
This assumed that the combat- 
inexperienced Devens kne-w 
ho-w to "read" terrain. 

After midnight of October 21, 
Devens' companies crossed the 
river, followed by two companies 
of Col. William Raymond Lee's 
20th Massachusetts. The 20th 
Vk'ould guard the top of Balls 
Bluff and protect Devens' rear. 
Retracing his patrol's steps, a 
shocked Devens discovered that 
there ^vas no camp. The patrol 
had mistakenly identified moon 
shado^vs cast through a row of 
trees as enemy tents. Devens 
dispatched Howe (again) to 
report to Stone; afterwards, 
believing that he was undetected 
by rebels, Devens decided to 
remain in Virginia. It was this 

belief and not an evaluation 
of terrain that persuaded him 
to stay. 

Hovk^ever, shortly after 
Howe's departure, a 
Confederate patrol attacked 
Devens; after a brief skirmish, 
both sides withdrew. His 
presence no-w known to the 
enemy, Devens rejoined Lee at 
the bluff. Shortly before, the 
20th had taken one casualty 
after encountering the enemy. 
This, and gunfire heard from 
Devens' skirmish, persuaded 
Lee to order across five more 
companies of the 20th and two 
light artillery pieces.' 

Around this time Howe was 
reporting to Stone that there 
was no camp — and thus, no 
Confederates. Now believing 
that few rebels stood between 
him and Leesburg, Stone 
decided to approach Leesburg, 
and perhaps occupy it. Howe 
returned to Harrison Island with 
instructions to cross the rest of 
Devens' 1 5th Massachusetts to 
the bluff. After Howe delivered 

his new orders he returned to 
the bluff. However, the report 
he had just delivered to Stone — 
that there were no rebels— now 
needed correction, so once 
again, Devens dispatched Ho^ve 
to Stone. 

Before Howe could report 
Devens' skirmish. Stone had 
summoned Col. (and Oregon's 
sitting U.S. Senator) Edward 
D. Baker, commander of the 
California Brigade. He wanted 
Baker to assume command on 
the bluff. Stone also gave him 
a broad grant of discretion: 
if Baker heard "heavy firing " 
from the bluff he could decide 
whether to cross his men 
and reinforce Devens or to 
-withdraw the 15th and 20th 
Massachusetts. Thus, Baker 
had authority to terminate the 
mission. After Baker left. Stone 
learned that perhaps 4,000 
Confederate troops were in 
the area. Baker received this 
information before crossing to 
the bluff; nevertheless, he told 
Stone that he would be crossing 


more artillery and the 42ncl 
New York infantry. As one 
historian of the battle has noted, 
"The stage ^vas set." 

Here the counterfactual 
question is asked: would 
terrain maps in the hands of 
Stone, Devens and Baker have 
changed the Battle of Balls 
Bluff? There is no evidence 
either that Union officers had 
such maps, or that such maps 
even existed. The most detailed 
map that would have been 
available in 1861 was an 1 853 
landownership map of Loudon 
County, which did depict "red 
shale cliffs" opposite Harrison 
Island, but displayed little 
topographic information (see 
Figure 15). 

First, consider the actual 
terrain, which was not -well 
mapped until after the battle. 
About three hundred yards 
of Potomac lay between 
Maryland's mainland and 

FIGURE 15 • Detail from Yardley ^a^yXor, Map of Loudon County, Virginia (Philadelphia, 1853), demonstrates that 
the Balls Bluff terrain was not well mapped before the battle. Reproduction courtesy Geography and Map Division, 
Library of Congress. 


Harrison Island, a spit of land 
two miles long and perhaps one- 
half mile 'wide. After crossing 
the island, another 100 yards 
of Potomac lay between the 
island and Virginia. Fronting 
the Virginia shore ■was the 
"600-yard long stretch of 
heavily wooded shale and 
sandstone cliff" of Balls Bluff, 
which rises to a height of 1 1 
feet. Separating this bluff from 
the river was a flat sandy plain 
of perhaps 50 yards. The only 
way to ascend the bluff from 
this plain was by a switchback 
path described by Colonel Lee 
as, "a winding one up the bluff 
[and] very narrow." 

The main battle was fought 
on the cleared field just atop the 
bluff, estimated between 5 to 10 
acres in size. By late October, 
the thick w^oods surrounding 
this field were still leafy. From 
a defender's standpoint, these 
trees concealed dangerous 

, 1 


-- \i 


-- A 

^ \ 

Si -^\ 

FIGURK 16* Detail from US Geological Survey, Waterford Quadrangle, VirginUi-Maryland, 7.5 Minute SerieJ 
(Reston, VA, 1979, photorevised 1984, illustrates that Balls Bluff was not mapped in sufficient detail until the end of the 
20th century to adequately depict the ruggedness of its terrain. 


terrain: inside the woods 
bordering the field's northern 
and southern perimeters were 
deep ravines that cut through 
to the Potomac. A failure to 
defend these ravines might 
allow an enemy to stealthily 
approach the flanks of any 
battle line in the cleared field. 
Moreover, the ascending side of 
the southern ravine rose above 
the cleared field, thus conferring 
important advantages on any 

A terrain map would 
have revealed the height of 
the bluffs, the ravines, their 
contours, and the width of the 
river crossings (see Figure 
1 6) . Would such a map have 
dissuaded Stone from ordering 
the initial reconnaissance? 
Unlikely While a platoon 
sized reconnaissance patrol, 
moving at night through enemy 
country would have benefited 
from a terrain map —it would 
have located structures (like 
the Jackson house) to avoid 
(or observe), as well as 

elevations to better monitor 
enemy activity. But to survive, 
patrols are themselves rarely 
burdened with the sometimes- 
daunting arithmetic of logistics: 
transporting, supplying or 
evacuating large numbers of 
troops. Nor do swift, stealthily 
moving reconnaissance patrols 
plan to confront enemies; thus, 
evaluating ground for their own 
defense is less important. 

Note that this patrol was 
only tasked to detect enemy 
activity. No record exists that 
Stone ever sought information 
about terrain. If as some 
historians suspect. Stone long 
had planned an advance from 
Balls Bluff to Leesburg, his 
indifference to terrain was 
curious— but consistent with 
that of other Union generals. 
Readers should also understand 
that Stone's lack of interest 
in terrain maps was not for 
want of opportunity to gather 
such information. Elements 
of the 1 5th Massachusetts had 
continuously occupied Harrison 

Island since October 4th. 

The next two questions 
involve more variables. Would 
a terrain map have changed 
Devens' decision to remain in 
Virginia? And would such a 
map have changed Baker's later 
decision to reinforce Devens? 
Baker not only lacked a terrain 
map, but also (and far worse), 
had never personally inspected 
the bluff's terrain before 
ordering reinforcements. 

First, consider Devens' 
decision. As noted above, 
Devens' orders implied that he 
knew (or would learn) about 
the terrain. Stone had limited 
him to where he could deploy 
("near the river"); whatever 
ground he did choose ^vould 
have to inspire confidence 
that it could be "undoubtedly 
[held] until re-enforced; " 
moreover, this ground must not 
only be held, but "successfully 
held against largely superior 
numbers.' Only when these 
conditions were satisfied (a tall 
order under any circumstances) 


^vas Devens permitted to "hold 
on and report." But as noted, 
Devens' decision to remain 
-was based not on terrain, but 
on subjective belief —what he 
thought the enemy knew. Only 
later did Devens go "thoroughly 
scouting the woods" near the 
bluff. A terrain map might 
have reminded him what 
the enemy knew was far less 
important than what his 20th 
Massachusetts' comrades could 

Here it is fair to ask what 
Colonel Lee thought he could 
defend. As Devens advanced 
to the "camp," Lee explored 
the terrain. It was Lee's two 
companies that would have to 
hold ground should Devens' 
retreat. Unlike Devens (a 
lawyer and politician), Lee was 
an expert at evaluating terrain. 
A nationally known railroad 
engineer, he had overseen the 
construction of railroads in 
Massachusetts, Vermont, and 

What did Lee know about 

the terrain at Balls Bluff? When 
he first arrived on the field it was 
dark, and he admitted to being 
"without any kno-wledge of the 
ground." Still, he deployed his 
companies, most probably in 
the cleared field. However, at 
first light he dispatched terrain- 
scouts beyond the southern 
and northern tree lines; he also 
personally inspected the ground. 
He learned about both ravines 
as well as the presence of rebels. 
Indeed, it quickly became 
common knowledge among his 
officers that these ravines could 
conceal an enemy. To meet this 
challenge, Lee extended his line 
of battle from the field into the 
woods on both flanks. This 
deployment was arguably the 
only sensible response to his 
vulnerability to flank attack. 
It was a purely defensive 
deployment. "That line was 
formed to cover Colonel 
Devens' retreat," Lee stated 
later, "not exactly to 
fight a battle, but to cover 
his retreat." 

And what did Lee think 
about this ground's ultimate 
defensibility? "A hundred 
men in an unknown country, 
surrounded by the hidden 
enemy & cut off virtually 
by the badness of transport 
from reinforcement, " the 
20th Massachusetts' Henry 
L. Abbott recalled the next 
day. "The col. [Lee] told us 
there was no doubt that it was 
all up with us." Indeed, Lee's 
pessimism became a well- 
known feature of the battle. 

A terrain map should 
not have been necessary to 
conclude that it is never wise 
to defend a position with a rear 
110 nearly vertical feet above a 
swift moving river. Beyond the 
obvious a terrain map would 
have revealed other features 
that should have given Devens 
and Baker serious pause before 
choosing to remain in Virginia. 

First, the cleared field's 
eastern perimeter (closest to 
the bluff) ^vas too short to 
deploy the number of infantry 


present. When the main 
battle began in earnest, the 
20th and 15th Massachusetts' 
lines were so cro-wded that 
the second line lacked room 
to safely fire through the 
first, thus idling defensive 
firepower at a critical time. 
Second, control of the field 
rested with the ravines to the 
north and south. Undefended, 
these could (and ultimately 
did) provide a corridor for 
Confederates to outflank the 
Union troops. After inspecting 
the terrain, Lee, and later 
Devens, understood this and 
extended their battle lines into 
the woods on both flanks. But 
the terrain-Ignorant Baker 
understood his role as morale 
builder rather than ground 
tactician. After he was killed 
in action, the Union position 
began to collapse. A terrain 
map would have suggested the 
difficulty of defending these 
ravines. Personal inspection 
should have dissuaded Devens 
from remaining in Virginia; 

even if he chose to remain, a 
map-wise Baker might have 
ordered a withdrawal before the 
Confederates had overwhelmed 
and surrounded his position. 

Third, and even more 
conjecturally, a terrain map in 
hand might have forced Union 
commanders to confront or at 
least not ignore certain brutal 
realities of local logistics. 
Professional soldiers always 
plan lines of retreat. Evacuating 
400, or later, 1,700 troops down 
a narrow switchback path onto 
a cramped riverbank and then 
across seventy-five yards of 
swift flowing river in too few 
boats would have required 
holding the bluff for many 
hours in the first case and far 
too many hours in the second. 

Consider the math: it took 
five hours to cross Devens' 
and Lee's 400 men; even as 
transports were added later, 
crossing L^OO men meant that 
the bluff ^vould have to be held 
for 15 or 20 hours — and held 
with a steadily diminishing 

force. Even if one persisted in 
making Baker's unwise choice, 
a wholly different deployment 
might have been required to 
secure lines of retreat rather 
than continuing to feed a static 
defense of the bluff. 

Inexperience, poorly defined 
chains of command, the lack 
of effective communications, 
the fog of war and even 
personal impulsiveness were 
factors in the Union defeat at 
Balls Bluff. Terrain maps are 
no panacea for any of these. 
But with such maps in hand 
commanders would have been 
better focused on a difficult 
defense and the growing 
probabilities of evacuation. 
At a minimum, maps would 
have given commanders a 
common schematic from 
which they could visualize 
their shared peril. One always 
can wish away an enemy, 
beam confidence, and hope 
for the best; but nature's 
obstacles cannot be so easily 
discounted. •^ 



1. "Ball's Bluff was an accident, " James A. 
Morgan, III, A Little Short of Boa t.K The Fujht 
at Batl[i Bluff imefEdminKi Ferry, October 21-22, 
1861: AHiitory and Tour Guide (Ft. Mitchell, KY: 
Ironclad Publishing, 2004), 3; "What started 
out as a surprise attack on a small unguarded 
Confederate camp had turned into a military 
disaster," Ted Ballard, Staff Ride Guide: Battle 

of Ball[i Bluff {VJa^sWington, DC: Center of 
Military History, U. S. Army, 2001), 37; "[A] 
battle neither side intended or wanted to fight," 
Byron Farwell, Ball'j Bluff A Small Battle and Itj 
Lone/ Shadow (McLean, VA: EPM Publications, 
1990), 7; also see generally, Kim Bernard 
Holien, Battle at Ball'j Bluff: Leejburg, Virguiui, 
October 21, 1861 (Alexandria, VA: Rapidan Press, 
1989). For most Civil War engagements, it 
is almost impossible to determine the exact 
numbers engaged and casualties suffered. The 
number of 250 federal dead is an estimate (w^ith 
w^hich I concur) taken from Morgan, A Liltle 
Short of BoaLi, 184. A restatement of the official 
casualties may be found in Ballard, Staff Ride, 52. 

2. The most notorious examples of map failure 
or the neglect to reconnoiter terrain w^ould 
include: the failure of McClellan's maps to 
depict the Wanvick River as bisecting Virginia's 
Lo^ver Peninsula, despite the fact that the 

area had been in continuous settlement for 
three centuries; despite occupying the tow^n of 
Fredericksburg for tw^o days, Burnside neglected 
to properly survey the approaches to Marye's 
Heights, thus failing to anticipate several 
battlefield obstacles; despite having nearly 24 
hours opportunity. Union officers at Gettysburg 
neglected to properly reconnoiter the extent 
of their 'Tishhook" line on July 1, thus leaving 
themselves vulnerable to a flank attack the next 
day at Little Round Top; perhaps the most costly 
neglect of all w^as Grant's general failure during 
the Overland Campaign to properly reconnoiter 
the ground over which his troops would attack. 

Dranesville some 12 miles south of Leesburg. 
McClellan believed that this movement caused 
the Confederates to evacuate Leesburg; thus he 
ordered Stone to make a "slight demonstration" 
on Virginia's side of the Potomac. McClellan's 
intention w^as to persuade the rebels that 
Leesburg faced attack from the south (McCall) 
and from the east (Stone.) See OR. I.V.290, 
Colburn to Stone, October 20, 1861; the size of 
the patrol is unclear. 

5. OR. I.V.299-300, Special Orders No. -, Stone 
to Devens, October 20, 1861, 10:30 PM. 

6. OR. I.V299-300, Special Orders No. --, Stone 
to Devens, October 20, 1861, 10:30 PM; Stone 
ordered Lee to cross one company; because of 
reduced numbers in each company, Lee crossed 
two; OR. I.V.308-312, Report of Devens to Stone, 
October 23 1861. 

7. Morgan, A Little Short ofBoatd, 49-50; 
Richard F. Miller, Harvard j Civil War: AHLitory 
of the Lventieth Majiiachiuiettj Volunteer Infantry 
(Lebanon, NH: University Press of New 
England, 2005), GA. 

8. OR. I.V.308-312, Report of Devens to Stone, 
October 23 1861. 

9. Morgan, A Little Short of BoaLi, 7\. The 
sequence of Stone's meetings with Howe and 
Baker can also be found in the narrative histories 
cited earlier. See the order from Stone to Baker, 
OR. 1.V.303, October 21 1861, and the situation 
report from Stone to Baker, OR. I.V303, 11:50 

10. Morgsin, A Little Short of Boat^, 1,32,43; 
Report of the Joint Coininittee on the Conduct of the 
War (Wilmington, NC: Broadfoot Publishing, 
reprint, 1998), Volume 2, "Testimony of William 
Raymond Lee," 475, (cited hereafter as JCCW). 

11. Miller, HarmirKi Civil War, 72. 

not order any topographical surveys might be 
evidence against the proposition that Stone had 
long planned a major crossing at Balls Bluff. 

14. Baker's mistakes are a mainstay of the 
Balls Bluff narrative. For various critiques, 
see Morgan, A Little Short ofBoatj, 4; Miller, 
Harvard'^ Civil War, 72; Ballard, Battle of Ball'j 
Bluff 22; Hohen, Battle at Ball j Bluff 64; Farwell, 
Ball'j Bluff, 91-94; apropos of terrain maps, a 
theme common to most Baker critiques was his 
ignorance of Balls Bluff terrain and his failure 

to properly reconnoiter the area. Long after the 
battle Lee w^as asked if he thought that Baker's 
deployment orders w^ere helpful. "I do not," Lee 
replied under oath. "I think Colonel Baker had 
too little know^ledge of the ground upon w^hich 
^ve w^ere to fight." JCCW, "Testimony of Lee," 

15. Ezra J. Warner, General m Blue: Live j of the 
Union Coininanderj (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State 
University Press, 1992), 122-123, (Devens); 
Miller, Harmrd'j Civil War, 22-24, (Lee). 

16. /CCir, "Testimony of Lee," 476, 478. The 
20^*" Massachusetts' Captain Crowninshield 
told Baker that the federals' left flank needed 
reinforcement; he was ignored. "Journal of 
Brevet Brigadier Casper Crowninshield, " entry 
for October 20, 1861, Boston Public Library, 
Special Collections. 

17. Robert Garth Scott, editor. Fallen Leaves: 
The Civil War Letters of Alajor Heniy Livennore 
Abbott, 60, 6Z, Henry Abbott to father, October 
22, 1861; Francis W ^aXiTey, /Memoir of William 
Franeui Bartlett (Boston: Houghton, Osgood and 
Company, 1878), 25, Bartlett to Mother, October 
25, 1861. 

18. Miller, Harvard's Civil War, 65, 69. 

19. Morgan, A Little Short of Boats, 38. 

3. The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the 
Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies 
(Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 
1881), Series I, Volume V, 557-558, McClellan to 
Stone, August 11, 1861 (hereafter cited as OR.). 

4. This basic narrative can be extracted from 
any of the Balls Bluff secondary studies cited 
above. A key event has been omitted from 
considerations of space. On October 20, 
McClellan notified Stone that Gen. George A. 
McCall's force of 12,000 men had just occupied 

12. JCCW, "Testimony of Charles Devens, " 403. 

13. Andrew E. Ford, The Story of the Fifteenth 
Reg unent Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry in the 
Civil War, 1861-186-1 (Clinton, MA: W.J. Coulter, 
1898), 59. Scholars have long speculated 

that Stone had a plan (developed long before 
McClellan had asked him to make a "slight 
demonstration") that entailed ascending the 
bluff — a place that Confederates did not picket — 
in order to capture Leesburg. No such plan has 
yet been found. However, the fact that Stone did 


lllillillllli THl Wll THlOlliH MIPS 

Creating the Gettysburg Podt-Battte Map,i 

BY RONALD E. GRIM • Curator of Maps, Norman B. Leventhal Map Center 

Prior to the conflict, few adequate topographic maps existed 
for any of the major theaters of war. While the armies rushed 
to remedy that situation, quickly mapping key areas, most of 
the maps by which w^e know individual battles were compiled 
after the war. Commanding officers often attempted to have 
battlefields mapped shortly after the action in order to submit 
graphic documentation with their official reports; however, there 
generally was not sufficient time to prepare detailed topographic 
maps that accurately depicted the order of battle. 

when the Union and 
Confederate armies met and 
fought near Gettysburg, 
Pennsylvania, July 1-3, 
1863, commanding officers 
had only one detailed map 
of the area available to 
them as they selected their 
positions and planned their 

strategies. That map ^vas a 
lando-wnership map of Adams 
County published in 1858 
(see Figure 17). In addition 
to farmsteads with names of 
residents, it delineated roads, 
towns, and streams, but very 
little topographic detail. 
Since the battle, however, the 

to^vn of Gettysburg and the 
surrounding countryside have 
been mapped and remapped 
innumerable times. In fact, 
the Library of Congress and 
National Archives' Civil War 
map collections, representing 
the two largest such collections 
in the country include more 


FIGURE 17* G.M. Hopkins, Afap qf Ada, m Co., Peniuylvania (Philadelphia, 1858). 
Reproduction courtesy Geography and Map Division, Library of Congress. 

than 150 maps related to 
Gettysburg, far more than for 
any other battlefield associated 
with the war. Most of these 
were prepared after the battle, 
and many after the war. 

Considering the strategic 
significance of Gettysburg as 
the turning point of the war 
and the enduring interest, both 

from a military and a public 
perspective, in recording 
and interpreting the history 
of this key event, it is not 
surprising that there is such 
a vast cartographic legacy for 
this battle. Generally, these 
maps locate important sites 
associated with the battle, 
but more specifically depict 

the initial positions and the 
subsequent movements of the 
various brigades and regiments 
during the three days of the 
battle. Derived from many 
individual observations and 
experiences, they form a 
graphic representation that has 
shaped our collective memory 
of how the opposing armies 


FIGURE 18 • Gen. G.K. Warren's twenty-sheet manuscript map, Map of the Battle Field of Getty^ihurg (1868-1873) as 
displayed in the 2009 exhibition entitled "BIG. " Reproduction courtesy National Archives and Records Administration. 

encountered one another on a 
relatively unmapped terrain. 


Created for a variety of 
purposes and publications 
ranging from official 
government reports to popular 
histories, the Gettysburg 
after-battle maps date from 
shortly after the battle up 
to the present. Many are 
conventional battle maps, 
exemplified by Charles W. 
Reed's Plan of the Gettysburg 

Battle Ground published the 
year after the war (see Figure 
21). Reed, a Boston resident 
with considerable artistic 
talent, recorded information 
for his map while serving 
during the battle as a bugler 
with the Massachusetts 9th 
Battery. One of the more 
unusual representations of 
the battlefield is an untitled 
360-degree panorama or 
fish-eye view^, which was 
published about 1866 
(see pp. 138-9). 


For most historians of the 
Gettysburg campaign, the best 
known and most authoritative 
of these post-battle maps is 
a set of three maps compiled 
by Gouvernour K. Warren 
and John Bachelder under 
the direction of the Federal 
government and published 
in 1876. Using a detailed 
topographic base, these 
three maps provide the most 
authoritative delineation of 
troop positions and movements 


r ■ - '•*- ■" * 

■* k 


Iff 1. . I . - ,• 1 . 
iiiin !SmliM»r ]ii|t'lif4>2l)lirt 

Siirvf^voi! aiirl Ih nwn 

FIGURE 19* Detail from manuscript map showing title cartouche and names of officers responsible for creating map. 
Reproduction courtesy National Archives and Records Administration. 

for each day of the battle 
(see pp. 136-7). 

The basis for these three 
maps was a very well- 
executed, uniquely large- 
scale manuscript map of 
the battlefield. By focusing 
on this manuscript and the 
resulting set of three published 
maps, this essay will examine 
the process by which after- 
battle maps were compiled 
and how they influence our 
memory of the war. Originally 
drawn in four sections and 

measuring twelve feet by 
twelve feet, the manuscript 
map is now preserved among 
the cartographic records of 
the Office of the Chief of 
Engineers in the National 
Archives in twenty sheets, 
each measuring approximately 
two by three feet. When 
placed together the twenty 
sheets portray an area of 
approximately twenty-five 
square miles at a scale of one- 
inch equals 200 feet. The map 
is centered on the town of 

Gettysburg and encompasses 
the major portions of the 
battlefield (see Figures 18 & 19). 


The compilation of these 
outstanding post-battle maps 
was done under the auspices 
of the U.S. Army's Engineer 
Department, but two key 
individuals had primary 
responsibility for their creation. 
The first of these was the Army 
engineer, Gouvernour Kemble 
Warren. He is best known for 


his maps of the western United 
States published in 1857 and 
1858. Upon graduating from 
the Military Academy at West 
Point in 1850, Warren joined 
the elite Corps of Topographical 
Engineers. In 1855 he was 
assigned to the Office of 
Pacific Railroad Surveys with 
responsibility for compiling a 
composite map of the trans- 
Mississippi West based on data 
gathered during the several 
Pacific Railroad surveys 
(see pp. 82-3). 

During the Civil War, he 
entered the volunteer service as 
a lieutenant colonel in a New 
York regiment, rising rapidly 
to the rank of major general. 
He distinguished himself at the 
battle of Gettysburg, where 
he served as chief engineer for 
Gen. George Meade's Army 
of the Potomac. Specifically 
he rushed reinforcements to 
Little Round Top to thw^art 
a major Confederate assault, 
thus rescuing the Union 
Army's left flank from almost 

certain disaster. After the war 
he returned to engineering 
activities, mainly on the Upper 
Mississippi River. 

The other major personality 
associated with mapping the 
Gettysburg campaign was a 
civilian, John Badger Bachelder 
(1825-1894). He was the artist 
of an 1863 bird's-eye view of 
the battlefield and the leading 
19th centuiy historian of the 
Gettysburg battle. Born in 
New Hampshire and educated 
at a military school, Bachelder 
served as principal and 
instructor of militaiy tactics at 
Pennsylvania Military Institute 
in Reading, Pennsylvania, from 
1849-1853. Resigning that 
position because of ill health, 
he spent the next few years 
working as an artist. 

In the preface to one of his 
publications, he explained the 
origin of his involvement with 
the Gettysburg battlefield: " 
. . . from the commencement 
of hostilities I determined to 
seize upon the decisive battle of 

the war, and devote a life to its 
written and illustrated history 
... I arrived at Gettysburg while 
the dead lay unburied. For 
eighty-four days I traversed 
and sketched the vast field 
of twenty-five square miles, 
frequently accompanied by 
convalescents from the hospital, 
especially Confederates, who 
pointed out their positions and 
movements, all of which were 
carefully noted on the plan ..." 

The publication of his 
bird's-eye view of Gettysburg 
was only the beginning 
of Bachelder's life-long 
involvement with recording 
the history of the battle (see 
pp. 134-5). Subsequently, 
he commissioned a painting 
of Longstreet's assault at the 
battle, for which he wrote 
a descriptive booklet; he 
published a guidebook to 
the battlefield; he traveled 
widely and lectured about the 
battle; he served as director 
of the Gettysburg Battlefield 
Memorial Association; and 


he compiled a 2,500 page 
manuscript history of the battle. 
In recognition of his "services 
in the historical delineation 
of the field of Gettysburg, " 
the citizens of Gettysburg 
commissioned and presented 
Bachelder with a scale model 
of a cannon made from shot 
and shells found on the field. 
This gift is now the property of 
the historical society in Hyde 
Park, Massachusetts, where 
Bachelder lived after the war. 
(see pp. 134-5). 


Although the initial 
topographic surveys were 
begun in 1868 — five years after 
the battle— the three battlefield 
maps were not published until 
1876— thirteen years after the 
battle. This lengthy time period 
for completion reflects not only 
the Army's desire to record 
in detail the actions of this 
most important battle, but also 
the problems encountered in 
resolving conflicting reports of 

the action during the battle. 

The topographic survey, as 
recorded on the manuscript 
map was conducted under the 
direction of Warren. "Under 
the direction of" means just 
that. Warren was not at 
Gettysburg when the initial 
surveys were conducted in 1868 
and 1869. Rather, he spent 
most of that time supervising 
the construction of bridges and 
navigational improvements 
on the Mississippi River. 
Consequently, the bulk of 
the survey was left to his 
lieutenants, William H. 
Chase, Thomas Turtle, and 
Frederick A. Hinman. They 
were recent graduates of 
the Military Academy at 
West Point and had not seen 
any action in the Civil War. 
Archival records indicate that 
Chase supervised the project. 
The names of his assistants 
and their responsibilities are 
recorded on the manuscript 
map. Additional surveys and 
corrections were made in 1870 

by John H. Dager, a member 
of the original survey team, 
and by Percy M. Blake, a civU 
engineer in 1873 (see Figure 

Warren, however, did attend 
closely to the supervision of 
the map's drafting, reduction, 
editing, and publication. 
After the initial surveys were 
completed in the fall of 1869, he 
was joined by William Chase 
in St. Paul where they drafted 
the original manuscript map. 
Beginning in 1870, they started 
to prepare a reduced base map 
at a scale of 1 inch equals 800 
feet, from which they printed 
proof sheets at a scale of 1 inch 
equals 1000 feet. Proof sheets 
were circulated for comments 
and corrections to twenty-one 
officers who were involved in 
the battle. 

With all this Army 
involvement, what was 
Bachelder s role? On 
the manuscript map, his 
contribution was limited to 
providing information about the 


these maps . . . are pronounced more elaborate and complete than 
any battle-maps ever pub lu bed in thu or any other countiy. 

names of residents at the time 
of the battle. His contribution 
to the printed map, however, 
was much greater. Using 
"official reports, consultations 
on the field, private letters, and 
oral explanation," Bachelder 
prepared troop positions for the 
three maps, one for each day 
of the battle. Six phases of the 
battle were represented sho-wing 
the position of every corps, 
division, brigade, regiment, and 
battery of both armies. 

Finally in 1876 with the 
assistance of Bachelder, the 
set of three maps overlaid ^vith 
troop positions was published. 
Bachelder copyrighted the 
position plates and also acted as 
the publisher for the set of three 
maps, selling them for $5-10. In 
promoting the map, Bachelder 
declared: "these maps . . . are 
pronounced more elaborate and 
complete than any battle -maps 

ever published in this or any 
other country." Attesting to 
the maps' commercial success, 
subsequent editions appeared in 
1883 and 1912. 


what the manuscript map 
and the set of three published 
maps depict is quite remarkable, 
both from temporal and 
geographical perspectives. 
Temporally, the manuscript 
map covers two dates or 
situations. First, it records what 
w^as observed at the time of 
the 1868-69 survey; second, it 
identifies changes that occurred 
subsequent to the time of the 
battle. Equally note-worthy for 
the period, the maps published 
in 1876 attempt to recreate 
the battle as it occurred over a 
sequence of three days (each 
portrayed on a separate sheet), 
AvhUe most other Civil War 

battle maps depict the entire 
time frame of the battle on 
one sheet. 

Geographically, the 
manuscript map is unusual 
because of its extremely large- 
scale representation of the 
physical and cultural landscape. 
Dra^vn at a scale of 1 inch 
equals 200 feet, it used 4-foot 
contours to depict the terrain. 
The level of detail contained 
in the map was unprecedented 
for such a large geographical 
area, especially in mid- 1 9th 
century topographic mapping. 
Aspects of the area's physical 
geography such as streams, 
rock outcroppings, marshes and 
trees were indicated by symbols 
that are easily recognized 
today. Moreover, the maps' 
use of contours, although not 
a cartographic innovation, was 
very unusual at this time. It 
was not until the end of the 



19th century that the U.S. 
Geological Survey standardized 
the use of contour lines on U.S. 
topographic maps, generally 
using 20 and 50-foot contour 

The symbols used to 
represent the cultural or man- 
made features of the landscape 

were more innovative. The 
map's legend explains the 
various devices and symbols 
used to portray these features. 
For example, three fence types 
are differentiated: a dotted line 
for a stone wall; a zigzag line 
for a Virginia fence; and a 
dashed line for a straight (rail 





or board) fence. There are also 
three symbols for buildings: a 
rectangle -with a single X is a 
single house; a rectangle with 
a double X is a church; and a 
rectangle with shading is an 
outbuilding. A rectangle with 
dashed lines indicates that the 
building had burned while a 
small blue cross by a building 
notes that it was not standing 
at the time of the battle. Letter 
symbols indicate building 
construction materials: B for 
brick, W for wood, and S for 
stone. At houses where there 
are two names, the one in black 
lists the resident at the time of 
the survey ^vhile the one in red 
is the name of the resident at the 
time of the battle (see Figure 
20) . Only fire insurance and real 
estate maps, which were first 
published for America's ma; or 
cities following the Civil War, 
depicted as much information. 
Using these symbols. 

FIGURE 20* Detail from manuscript map focusing on one farmstead displaying many of the symbols used on the map. 
Reproduction courtesy National Archives and Records Administration. 


it is easy to visualize the 
geographical landscape of 
mid- 19th century Adams 
County. The rural countryside 
was dotted -with numerous 
farmsteads, represented by a 
cluster of rectangles symbolizing 
individual buildings, while 
fence lines delineated roads, 
gardens, and fields. Orchards 
were indicated by a regular 
pattern of single trees. Other 
rural establishments, such as 
inns, taverns and schoolhouses, 
were also identified. The central 
focus of the map is the town of 
Gettysburg, with its circular 
square and the rectangular grid 
of streets. Besides the numerous 
houses and businesses, there 
were several churches in town. 
Equally evident are the nine 
roads that converge on the 
town highlighting its central 
location, functioning as a market 
town and county seat. Other 
prominent landmarks around 
the town are also identified. To 

the west of to-wn is the Lutheran 
Theological Seminary which 
served as Robert E. Lee's 
headquarters during the battle, 
and just north of the tow^n 
center is a large brick building 
identified as Pennsylvania 
College (now Gettysburg 
College), which was used as 
a hospital. Another feature 
recorded on the manuscript 
map, but that obviously did not 
exist at the time of the battle 
is the National Cemetery, 
constructed adjacent to the 
already existent Evergreen 


Today, the battlefield is 
quiet and peaceful, except for 
the thousands of tourists ^vho 
come to remember and pay 
homage. Our modern memory 
of the battle is preserved and 
interpreted by the National Park 
Service in administering the 
Gettysburg National Military 

Park. A highlight of the 
visitors' center is a cyclorama 
painting, first displayed in 
Boston in 1884, portra3ring 
Pickett's Charge (see pp. 
140-1). Throughout the park, 
there are numerous monuments 
commemorating the officers and 
military units that participated 
in the battle. The placement 
of these monuments and the 
interpretation of the battle are 
based on the historian's record, 
and that narrative is in large 
measure informed by the maps 
created by Gouvernour K. 
Warren and John B. Bachelder. 
Compiled and published within 
fifteen years of the battle, they 
provided a remarkably detailed 
representation of the physical 
and cultural geography of the 
Gettysburg area, as ^vell as a 
composite graphic depiction 
of the military activities that 
occurred on those fateful 
three days at the beginning of 
July 1863.^ 

FIGURE 21 • Detail from Charles W. Reed, PLiii of the Gettyjburg Battleground, [Boston], 1864 (see pp. 138-9). 



Bachelder, John B. 

Getty^iburg: Dcfcrlptioii of the Palntinq oj 

the "RepuLie ofLong^treet'j Ajjaidt, " 

painted by Jamej Walker. 

New York, 1870. 

Bachelder, John B. 
Getly^ihurg Piiblicalioiu. 
Boston, n.d. 

LiUey, David A. "Anticipating the 
Attaj to Accompany the Ofjicial RecorAi: 
Post- War Mapping of Civil War 
Battlefields," Lincoln Herald, 84 
(Spring 1982): 37-42. 

Stephenson, Richard W., comp. 
Cii'll War Mapti: An Annotated Luit 
of Mapd and Atlajcj m the Library of 
CongrcM. Washington, DC: Library 
of Congress, 1989. 

U.S. National Archives. 

A Guide to the Civil WarMap^ 

in the National Archives. 

Washington, DC: National Archives 

Trust Fund Board, 1986. 

Van Ee, Patricia Molen. "The 
Coming ol the Transcontinental 
Railroad: The Warren Maps." Pp. 
172-5, in Mapping the We^it: America j 
Westward Movement, 1524-1890. 
Edited by Paul E. Cohen. New 
York: Rizzoli, 2002. 



TKe Civil War, from 1861 to 1865, is the centerpiece of our nation's 
story. It looms large, not merely because of its brutality and scope 
but because of its place m the course of American history. The 
seeds of w^ar w^ere planted long before 1861 and the conflict remains 
part of our national memory. 

Geography has shaped each part of this narrative. The physical 
landscape influenced economic differences between the regions, the 
desire to expand into new territories and the destiny of these areas, 
the execution of the conflict both m the field and on the home front, 
and the v^ays in which our recollections have been shaped. 

Maps enable us to present the complex strands that, w^hen woven 
together, provide a detailed account of the causes and conduct of 
the war. These visual images remain a salient aspect of our memory. 
The photographs, prints, diaries, songs and letters from the richness 
of the Library's many holdings enhance our ability to tell this story, 
w^hen our nation, as a Currier & Ives cartoon depicts, was about to 
e lorn m Iwo. 


Currier & Ives 

N ew Y ork, 1864. L ithograph, 15 x 20 inchs. Print Dept. 

Published during tlie 1864 
Presidential campaign, this 
political cartoon depicts 
Abraham Lincoln and J efferson 
D avis pulling on opposite ends of 
a map, tearing the U nited States 
in two pieces, while D emocratic 

candidate G eorge M cC lellan 
takes an intervening stance. This 
image, incorporating caricature 
and map, characterizes our 
story, that the C ivil W ar almost 
dissolved a tenuous union forged 
85 years earlier. We do not focus 

just on the actual "tearing" (the 
war and battles), but we also 
examine the process by which 
the young nation reached this 
critical point in its history, and 
how the war and its heroes were 






Most timelines of the Civil War begin m April 1861 with the firing 
on Fort Sumter, a federal facility in South Carolina which had 
seceded five months earlier. Those shots were the technical start 
of the ^war but the underlying causes had been present for decades. 
Diversity had been the hallmark of the disparate 13 colonies, but 
becoming a nation took more than merely declaring independence. 

These fledglings shared a common purpose, to be different from 
Europe. Here hard work would result in the virtue and dignity 
necessary to participate in a republic. Yet the differences did not 
ebb as the founders had hoped, nor could compromise and political 
balance serve as a safeguard against increasing differences of 
economics, politics and moral sensibilities as the nation expanded 
physically and demographically. 

Each side, South and North, slave and free, believed that it was 
the legitimate heir to fulfill the nation's destiny but they became 
so incompatible that the differences threatened to truly "tear the 
nation in two. " 


oil iOOlTlY, 

By 1861, life was very different north 
and south of the Mason-Dixon line. 
Although neither was monolithic, 
industry, reliable transportation and 
a wage labor force prevailed m the 
North. Agriculture dominated the 
South where limited transportation 
and few urban areas were not a 
problem for the realm w^here cotton 
■was "king. " Moral superiority and 
political expediency were heaped 
on these economic differences, each 
side drawing on those aspects of 
the American ideal that most suited 
its needs. 

Southerners defended slavery, yet 
there was increasing opposition. 
Some decried its economic 
inefficiency. Others saw it an 
impediment to the growing republic. 
Slaves could go back to Africa 
but not into the new territories 
of the United States. At the core 
were those who objected on moral 
and humanitarian grounds. They 
called for the complete abolition of 
slavery throughout the union and 
its territories. They provided aid 
for those who bravely ran away, 
providing guidance, resources, 
and safe harbor along the 
Underground Railroad. 

While the war w^ould pit North 
against South, it was the West 
that became untenable. Physical 
expansion marked the country's 
first decades and the extension to 
the Pacific by mid- 19* century 
represented more than just economic 
gam. It was the nation's Manifest 
Destiny to spread, but which vision 
would hold m these new territories? 
Before they took to arms, Americans 
battled m the courts, state houses. 
Congress, and individual states. 
The election of Lincoln m 1860 led 
the Southern states to believe that 
secession was their only option. 




smPCMAi^U /»,.,;, 


At first glance, this brightly 
colored and tastefully 
decorated map, published 
shortly before the war, depicts 
a country that is unified and 
prosperous. The message is 
reinforced by an attractive 
cartouche which is adorned 
^vith an eagle, the icon of 
national unity, spreading its 
^vings over the title and a 
h3rpothetical landscape scene. 

This view displays a train and 
steamboat moving a^vay from 
a rural countryside past a city, 
an intriguing juxtaposition 
suggesting a natural 
progression of economic 

However, closer examination 
reveals major regional 
differences. It is easy to see the 
dense pattern of information 
covering the northern and 
midwestern states, ^vhich are 
dotted with many cities and 
towns connected by a complex 
network of railroads. In fact 
the density is so great for the 
New England states, that the 
mapmaker included a separate 
inset. On the other hand, the 
more rural southern states 
display considerable empty 
space, reflecting a smaller 
number of cities and towns and 
a much less developed network 
of railroads. The West is not 
depicted, probably because 

railroads and tow^ns had barely 
begun to penetrate these 
recently acquired territories. 
However, this omission also 
conveys the message that the 
West, as a region, was not fully 
integrated into the political and 
economic core of the country. 

These differences in 
settlement patterns and 
infrastructure, although not 
the cause of tension, reflected 
differences in livelihood and 
lifestyle that underlay the 
frictions threatening to tear the 
country apart. This was not a 
unified "nation, " particularly 
because the disparate regions 
did not share a common 
economy and culture.* 

62 "^ One Country, Tii'o Ciiltu 

Ensign, Bridgman & Fanning 


New York, 1859. Pruited map, 32 x 35 inchej. 


OlTHlll LllliOlPli^ OITIli 1 MILLS 

The cities, towns, and factories 
that dotted the northeastern 
landscape ^vere one of the 
settlement features that 
characterized the North, 
reflecting an economy and 
culture that was heavily 
industrial and urban. The 
Industrial Revolution, which 
greatly accelerated urban 
gro-wth, was introduced into 
southern New England at the 
beginning of the 19*'' century. 

with textile mills and other 
factories taking advantage of 
the waterpower offered by 
the rivers and streams flowing 
throughout the region. 

Lowell, Massachusetts, as 
mapped and illustrated in this 
large-scale town plan published 
in 1850, was the epitome of 
a company factory town. 
Founded only 25 years earlier 
by Boston financiers, the city 
experienced phenomenal 

growth. In 1850, Lowell 
had a population of 30,000, 
making it the second largest 
city in Massachusetts and the 
largest industrial community 
in the nation. The primary 
focus of Lowell's industry was 
textiles, highlighted by thirteen 
factories depicted in the 
marginal illustrations. 

It is one of the paradoxes 
of the antebellum years that 
the raw material that supplied 
Lo^vell's factories and created 
its wealth was cotton from 
the American South. The 
factories first employed single 
women from the surrounding 
Ne^v England country-side but 
eventually they were replaced 
by Irish immigrants in the 
1830s and I840s.> 

64 '^ One Cflunhy, Two Ciiltu 

Sidney and Neff 


Philadelphia, 1850. Printed map, 47 x 55 liic/mj. 


Southern settlement patterns, 
in contrast to those in the 
northeast, can be characterized 
as rural and agricultural. 
Although a fe^v railroads had 
been constructed by the end 
of the 1850s, railroad mileage 
and connectivity were limited. 
There continued to be a heavy 
reliance on river transportation 
as suggested by this five-sheet 
strip map of the Mississippi 
River published in 1862. 

Cutting through the heart 
of the country, the Mississippi 
River provided rich alluvial 
soils that were easily adapted 
to agriculture. Along the 
louver Mississippi, in southern 
Louisiana and in the vicinity 
of New Orleans, sugar was the 
primary crop, while further 
north in northern Louisiana 
and the states of Mississippi, 
Arkansas, and Tennessee, 
cotton was the major cash crop. 
Of the many features shown on 
the map, the title specifically 
calls attention to "sugar and 
cotton plantations. " While 
individual plantations are not 
associated ^vith either crop, 
the names of plantations and 
land owners identify the large 
landholdings lining the river's 
edge. These long linear and 
irregularly-shaped lots w^hich 
provided many plantations 
direct access to the river 
reflect the original French and 

Spanish settlement of this area. 

Louisiana had about 1,300 
sugar plantations in 1860, with 
about 25 per cent of the state's 
sugar production coming from 
the plantations depicted on 
an 1859 landownership map 
of three parishes near Baton 
Rouge. The accompanying 
detail depicts a number of these 
long-lot plantations, many of 
which were noted for extensive 
sugar production, lining the 
meanders of the -west bank of 
the Mississippi River opposite 
the river towns of Port Hudson 
and Bayou Sara.-f 

66 "^ Ofif Country, Tii'o Ciiltii 



















« \ 


• r 

James T. Lloyd 

Ne'w York, 1862. Pruitei) map, five sheets, each 40 x 12 uiches. 

Andrew J. Powell and Robert H. Bradford 

New York, 1859. Pn/itee) map, 72 x 54 inches. Courtesy Lawrence Calclu'ell. 


During the antebellum period, 
cotton was considered "king" 
in the southern economy, 
recognizing that it was the 
region's predominant cash 
crop. Cotton cultivation began 
in coastal South Carolina, 
but with the invention of the 
cotton gin in 1793, it rapidly 
spread across the piedmont 
regions of Georgia, Alabama, 
and Mississippi into Arkansas 
and Texas. Requiring fertile 
soil and a long growing season 

of 180 to 200 days, there 
was a northern geographic 
boundary to cotton cultivation 
as suggested by the "mean 
summer temperature " line on 
this highly detailed statistical 
map delineating the major 
areas of southern cotton 

Published in Boston in 
1863, this map was one of 
many documents about cotton 
authored by Ed-ward Atkinson, 
a Brookline resident. Before 
and during the war, he served 
as an accountant and executive 
officer for a number of cotton 
textile factories in the Boston 
area, but was also an ardent 
abolitionist, writing numerous 
articles and tracts advocating 
the cultivation of cotton with 
free labor. Of the numerous 
liberal causes in vi^hich he ^vas 

involved, one was the New 
England Freedman's Society 
founded to assist freed slaves 
on South Carolina's coastal 
islands, occupied by Union 
troops during most of the war. 

The accompanying 
photograph depicts African 
slaves sorting cotton on a 
South Carolina plantation. It 
^vas taken in 1862 by Henry 
P. Moore, a New Hampshire 
artist and photographer, while 
recording the activities of 
Union regiments following 
their occupation of Port 
Royal, November 7, 1861. 
During this period of Union 
control, southern land owners 
abandoned their plantations, 
leaving the slaves as 
contraband under the care of 
the northern troops. ♦ 

Henry P. Moore 


Ca. 1862. ALbiimeii print, 11 x 14 inchej. Rare Book Dept. 

68 '^ One Country, Tii'o Ciiltii 

r «r -Ami i^ ''A^ " '^~ 



. idd_rte^« 




■ I f 1 1 y a— 


Edward Atkinson 


Boston, 1863. Pruited map, 21 x 18 inchej. 


COTTOl Tllll 1 lIPLOMliY 

Besides suppljring cotton as a 
raw material for New England 
textile mills, the South also 
developed an extensive cotton 
trade with Europe, particularly 
England and France. This 
innovative and colorful 
graphic, created by French 
engineer Charles Minard, 
provides a global perspective 
of the mid- 19th century 
cotton trade. Specifically, it 
demonstrates the dramatic 




changes that occurred in the 
quantities of cotton imported 
into Europe before (1858), 
during (1864), and after the 
war (1865). 

Using colored flow lines, 
scaled to the tonnage of 
cotton traded, this statistical 
representation identified 
four ma; or source regions for 
cotton traded to Europe — 
United States, East Indies and 
China, Egypt and Syria, and 
Brazil. According to Minard's 
research, the South accounted 
for 84% of this volume before 
the war, but with the North's 
blockade of the southern coast 
line that share dropped to less 
than 10% during the war. In 
depicting the Confederate 
states, which he labeled as Etattf 
Separatutte^ (Separated States), 
Minard outlined only the major 
cotton producing states — South 
Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, 
Mississippi, Louisiana, and 

Texas — and Florida. 

While Confederate 
politicians hoped to leverage 
the European dependence 
on southern cotton into 
international recognition 
and military aid, European 
industrialists turned to Egypt 
and the East Indies for their 
supply of cotton. In 1864, the 
East Indies' share of the trade 
jumped to GA% and Egypt's to 
21%. After the war, the South 's 
share increased to 17%, but 
African and Asian colonies 
continued as the primary 
sources, accounting for 7S% 
of the trade. •♦■ 

70 "^ One Country, Tii'o Ciiltu 

Charles Mmard 


Paris, 1 866. Printed map, 24 x 45.5 iiichu. CoiirteJy Library of Congress, Geography and Map Dwuwn. 



Based on 1860 census data, 
this visually striking map plots 
the slave percentage of total 
population by county for the 
southern states. Rather than 
showing a uniform distribution 
throughout the entire region, 


'X*, armV. 

it is readily apparent that 
there were several major slave 
concentrations, particularly 
^vhere commercial plantation 
agriculture was most profitable 
—tobacco in the coastal and 
piedmont regions of Virginia 
and Maryland; sugar in 
Louisiana along the lower 
Mississippi River; and cotton 
extending in a broad swath 

from coastal South Carolina, 
through the piedmont regions 
of Georgia, Alabama, and the 
Mississippi River Valley to 
coastal Texas. 

Attesting to this map's 
importance during the Civil 
War, it was intentionally 
depicted in Francis Bicknell 
Carpenter's oil painting, Fimt 
Reading of the Emancipation 
Proclamation of Pre^iident 
Lincoln, which hangs in the 
U.S. Capitol Senate wing. 
The artist's memoir records 
Abraham Lincoln's fascination 
with the map, not just for 
its symbolic power and 
visual appeal, but because it 
allowed him to trace military 
movements, and to relate those 
actions to his emancipation 
policies (see pp. 27-9). 

This map was also one 
of the first statistical or 
thematic maps published in 
the United States. Although 

not explicitly ackno^vledged 
on the map, it was produced 
by the U.S. Coast Survey. 
Specifically, it was drawn by 
Edwin Hergesheimer, a recent 
German immigrant who was 
employed as the Survey's Chief 
Draftsman. In addition, a 
statement boldly positioned 
at the map's top center, 
stating that it was sold for the 
benefit of the U.S. Army's 
sick and wounded soldiers, 
suggests that it reflected 
the interests of Alexander 
Dallas Bache, the Survey's 
Superintendent. Bache was an 
ardent abolitionist and had just 
become vice president of the 
U.S. Sanitary Commission. ♦ 

72 "^ One Country, Tii'o Ciilturej 






Edwin Hergesheimer 

Washington, DC, 1861 . Priiitecl map, 31 x 40 iiichej. 


illTIlillT II IIW lliLlll 

The anti- slavery movement had 
a long history and many voices. 
One of the earliest and most 
vocal was from the Quakers, 
first in Pennsylvania but also 
in New England and the Ohio 
River Valley. Although various 
New England denominations 
and societies were involved in 
the anti-slavery movement, this 
map showing Quaker meeting 
houses in New England not 
only underscores their rhetoric 
against slavery but also their 
involvement in assisting slaves 
to escape their bondage. 
By comparing this map with 
maps of the Underground 
Railroad, it is possible to see 
a strong correlation between 
the meeting houses and 
communities involved with 
the Railroad. 

Many other New 
Englanders were active in 
the anti-slavery moment, 
including several of the 



prominent citizens of 
Concord, Massachusetts. 
While this community is 
^videly recognized for its role 
in the American Revolution 
and the literary and 
philosophical "revolution" of 
Transcendentalism, it is less 
well known for its role in the 
anti-slavery movement. Many 
individuals, who were involved 
in the literary revolution of 
the 1830s and 1840s, also 
supported the anti-slavery 
movement, such as Ralph 

Waldo Emerson, Nathaniel 
Hawthorne, Henry Thoreau, 
and the Alcott family. 

This 1852 Ian downership 
map of Concord portrays 
the community a decade 
before the Civil War. Almost 
prophetically, the map marks 
the site of the first battle of 
the American Revolution just 
northwest of the village with a 
monument labeled "Birthplace 
of American Liberty. " It is also 
possible to locate the homes of 
a number of individuals who 
were involved in the anti- 
slavery movement. Emerson's 
and Hawthorne's homes are 
near the village center. Other 
residences that can be located 
on the map include those of 
Mary Rice, a station master on 
the Underground Railroad, and 
Peter Hutchinson, a free black. ♦ 

74 'h Anti-Stiwery Movement 

HI 4 Ml t'llV, \ m 

rii.M mill 

i^nioii ill hsjiniii ■■ litrt'liah 






H enry F. Walling 

N ew York, 1852. Printed map, 25x32.5 inches. 

H ew England Yearly M eeting of Friends 

S.I., 1850. Printed map, 22x16 incites. 


Because the Underground 
Railroad was based on the 
combined efforts of many 
sympathetic people working 
secretly to assist slaves in 
moving toward freedom, there 
were no contemporary maps 
to guide those who escaped or 
that depict the full extent of 
this complex communication 
network. However, historians 
have been able to document 


"stations" or places that 
assisted runaway slaves and 
the major routes that were 
travelled, based on oral 
histories gathered from slaves 
who reached freedom. 

While numerous maps 
depict the Underground 
Railroad showing only broad 
general lines of movement, a 
modern reconstruction, entitled 
"Freedom's Tracks," attempts 
to present as comprehensive as 
possible a depiction of the great 
number of routes, stations, and 
destinations. This colorful and 
detailed presentation is based 
on extensive research including 
a manuscript map that was 
compiled in the early 1940s 
from slave narratives collected 
and recorded during the 1 930s 
by the Federal Writers Project. 

It IS evident from this 
cartographic evidence that 
there were many recorded 
journeys generally in a south 

to north direction, both by 
land and sea, through all of the 
states north of the Ohio River 
and the Mason-Dixon Line, 
w^hich served as the boundaries 
between Slave and Free 
territories. However, there 
was a heavy concentration in 
the Mid- Atlantic and New 
England states. By examining 
closely both of these maps, 
it evident that there were a 
number of "stations" in the 
Boston area, including such 
documented stations as the 
William Jackson House in 
Newton, the William Lloyd 
Garrison House in Roxbury, 
the William IngersoU Bowditch 
House in Brookline, and the 
Lewis and Harriet Hayden 
House on Boston's Beacon 

76 "A" Antt-Slavery Movement 





Earl M cElfresh 

Olean, NY, 2005. Printed map, 22 x 32.5 inches. Courtesy M dEifresli M ap Company. 

Federal Writers Project 

C a. 1941. M anuscript map 34 x 29 indnes. Courtesy L ibrary of Congress, Geograpiiy andM ap Division. 


Besides escaping to northern 
states or Canada, another 
alternative for freed slaves was 
"colonization " or resettlement 
in Africa. Several organizations 
were founded to encourage 
and assist with this relocation, 
but this was not a universally 
appealing choice. One of the 
most successful of such efforts 
^vas directed by the American 
Colonization Society, which 
^vas organized in Washington, 
DC in 1816. 

This organization 
established a colony, named 
Liberia from the Latin ^vord 
for "free," on the west coast 
of Africa as a homeland for 
former slaves from the United 
States. From the time of its 
founding until the Civil War, 
the society assisted thousands 
of emancipated slaves in 
returning to Africa. An 1845 
map of Liberia published by 
the society shows that many 
place names were of African 

origin, yet several such as 
Monrovia, named in honor 
of President James Monroe, 
reflect a strong American 
influence as well. 

A world map that ^vas 
published about the same time 
in Boston locates missionary 
activity in the United States 
and around the world. The 
map was prepared by Joseph 
Tracy who served as the 
secretary of the Massachusetts 
Colonization Society, an 
affiliate of the American 
Colonization Society. He 
was also a leading figure 
^vith the American Board of 
Commissioners for Foreign 
Missions. Reflecting his 
corresponding interests, 
he located their mission in 
Liberia. -f 

78 'k AntL-Stiwery Movement 



• ■r 144 


^^ ' " - _A ^ 

William McLain and Randolph Coyle 


Baltimore, 1845. Printed map, 19.5 x 26 inchej. 

<■ Joseph Tracy 



Boston, 1843. Printed map, 39 X 74 uichej. 


During the antebellum period, 
Boston had a thriving free 
African American community. 
By 1860, more than half the 
city's black population of 2,000 
lived on the north slope of 
Beacon Hill adjacent to the 
Massachusetts State House. 
This neighborhood became a 

center for Boston's abolitionist 
movement and many fugitive 
slaves escaping via the 
Underground Railroad found 
refuge here. 

A portion of this 
neighborhood is depicted on 
a sheet from an 1860 Boston 
atlas, the first fire insurance 
atlas of the city and one of the 
first for any city. The map 
shows individual buildings, but 
unfortunately does not identify 
owners or residents. Ho-wever, 
by correlating the map with 
city directories, it is possible 
to determine that there was a 
large black population in this 
area. Of particular interest 
are the church and school on 
the alley (today's Smith Court) 
off Joy Street, signifying the 
location of the African Meeting 
House, the oldest extant black 
church building in the United 
States, and the Abiel Smith 
School, the only black public 

school in Boston until 1855 
when schools were integrated. 
Of the many fugitive slaves 
coming to Boston, one who 
received considerable publicity 
was Anthony Burns. His 
story is depicted in an 1855 
lithograph. Escaping slavery in 
Virginia, he ran away to Boston 
in 1854. Under provisions of 
the 1850 Fugitive Slave Act, 
he was arrested and tried. 
Subsequently, there was a rally 
in protest at Faneuil Hall as 
well as attempts to "rescue" 
him. President Franklin Pierce 
sent Federal marshalls to 
ensure order during the trial 
and a military escort for Burns' 
return, costing the government 

80 "^ Anti-Sliwery Movement 


• *ui^t»i* 





■• vi 



— 1 , .. . 1 





S A»M»f4t£ 4f^ 






% 1 


I L 

I *v| IJk^ Hi 

C. Pinney 

B oston, 1861. Atlas, opaa 20 x 31 Indnes. 

J ohn Andrews 


B oston, 1855. 1/1/ oodaagrawng with liter prss, 20.5 x 17.5 Inches. Print Dept. 


lifWlll, HO! Fill 01 SLlflf 



Published as a campaign poster 
supporting the Republican 
Party's first presidential bid in 
1856, this complex broadside 
used a map and 1850 census 
data to provide a commentary 
on the geographical and 
political sectionalism that was 
polarizing the nation. 
It tabulated the demographic 
and economic differences 
between free (pink) and slave 
(blue) states, highlighting 

their political concerns that 
the balance of Congressional 
power would shift as newly 
acquired western territories 
were admitted as states into the 
Union. The map clearly marked 
the 1820 Missouri Compromise 
line, which had defined the 
dividing line between free and 
slave states. However, the 
passage of the 1854 Kansas- 
Nebraska Act nullified this 
long-standing compromise line, 
and potentially opened the 
entire western territory (yellow) 
to slavery because it sanctioned 
"popular sovereignty" whereby 
citizens of each territory could 
vote on the slavery issue. 

While there is no explicit 
mention of the campaign, 
the poster includes portraits 
of Republican presidential 
candidate, John C. Fremont 
and his Vice- Presidential 
running mate, William L. 
Da3rton. Even more subtle 

is the depiction of the 
routes of Fremont's "famous 
explorations" through the West 
during the 1840s, which made 
him a national hero. 

Sectional interest in 
controlling the West was of 
primary interest during the 
1850s, particularly evident in 
the Pacific Railroad Surveys, 
conducted from 1853-54, under 
the direction of then Secretary 
of War, Jefferson Davis. Four 
east-west traverses, designed 
to satisfy both northern and 
southern sectional interests, 
were surveyed in order to 
determine the most practical 
route for the first trans- 
continental railroad. These 
potential routes were delineated 
on a "hurried" map prepared 
by Lt. G.K. Warren who also 
prepared the official battle maps 
of Gettysburg. ♦ 

82 'k Sectwiialuun an^ Wejtern Expanj 



• 1 

I- ^ 


G.W. Elliott 

New York, 1866. Printed map, 32.5 x 28 iiichej. 

Gouverneur K. Warren 

Washington, DC, 1855. Printed map, 22 x 24.5 inchej. 


IIW lliLlllllS 1 1I.001Y EllSli 

Hi ^•fei J. 

The Kansas-Nebraska Act 
of 1854 established two new 
territories with a provision that 
settlers would decide whether 
they entered the Union as free 
or slave states. This legislation 
negated the 1820 Missouri 
Compromise which previously 
designated Latitude 36° 30' (the 
southern boundary of Missouri) 
as the dividing line between free 
and slave states in the western 

As eastern Kansas was 
settled during the 1850s, 

intense competition and armed 
conflict developed between the 
pro-slavery and anti-slavery 
(Free State) factions. With the 
violence lasting from 1854-1858, 
the territory was commonly 
known as "Bloody Kansas." 
Pro-slavery settlers moved from 
neighboring Missouri which 
permitted slavery while groups 
such as the Massachusetts- 
based New England Emigrant 
Aid Company promoted anti- 
slaveiy settlement. Lawrence, 
Kansas, a center of anti- slavery 
activity, was named for noted 
philanthropist and abolitionist 
Amos Adams Lawrence, the 
company's secretary. His father 
and uncle were influential in 
developing the New England 
textile industry, particularly 
in Lowell and Lawrence, 

This conflict IS reflected in an 
1856 map published in Boston. 
It delineates the newly surveyed 

lands in eastern Kansas, as well 
as lands set aside for Indian 
reservations. The marginal 
illustrations depict the ruins of 
Lawrence's Eldridge Hotel, a 
haven for Free State emigrants. 
It was destroyed in 1856 by 
pro-slavery "border ruffians" 
from Missouri. Also depicted 
is Topeka's Constitution Hall, 
where Free Staters drafted an 
anti-slavery constitution. 

A broader Congressional 
reaction to the Bloody Kansas 
situation is portrayed in the 
accompanying cartoon by 
Winslow Homer. It depicts 
South Carolina Representative 
Preston Brooks beating 
Massachusetts Senator Charles 
Sumner with a cane on the floor 
of Congress. Sumner had just 
delivered a speech chastising 
southern states for promoting 
the violence in Kansas. ♦ 

84 "k SectionalLiin anr) Western Expanj 

j» M m H ^ 







u^}:mi UB^ 

tm wT-r"Tri "■ »■ 

5 4k^ Jii.«^ 

•<^ Winslo^v Homer 


Boston, \d)56. Lithograph, 16 x 21.5 inchej. Courtejy Bcutoii Athenaeum. 

E.B. Whitman and A.D. Searl 


Boston, 1856. Printed map, 27.5 x 21.5 inched. 




Reconstructed maps depicting 
Presidential election results for 
1856, 1860, and 1864 highlight 
the political tensions that 
underlay the strong sectional 
differences leading to the Civil 
War. The Whig party which 
flourished from the 1830s 
to the 1850s ceased to be a 
national force after the passage 
of the 1854 Kansas-Nebraska 
Act. Subsequently party 
politics became increasingly 
fragmented with the geographic 
patterns for subsequent 
elections displaying a distinct 
difference between the North 

and South. 

The 1856 election, marking 
the origins of the Republican 
Party, was a three-way 
race with Democrat James 
Buchanan defeating Republican 
John C. Fremont and Millard 
Fillmore, nominee of the Know 
Nothing party. The 1860 race, 
won by Republican Abraham 
Lincoln, had three other 
candidates. With the seceded 
states not voting in 1864, the 
race was between Lincoln 
and Democrat George B. 

These maps were published 

in 1932 as part of the nation's 
first historical atlas. Based 
on the combined research 
of numerous historians 
and geographers, it -was 
comprehensive in its coverage 
of U.S. history, mapping a 
variety of topics including 
Presidential election results 
by county from 1789 to 1928. 
Such maps are reminiscent of 
modern television newscasts 
which provide instantaneous 
updates for Presidential 
election results. ♦ 

86 * SectionalLiin anr) Western Expanj 

Charles O. Paullin and John K. Wright 


Washington, DC and New York, \97i2. Atlaj open, 14 x23 inches. Courtesy Amencan Geographical Society. 






As sectional tensions increased 
during the late 1850s, there 
was rising sentiment among 
the southern states advocating 
secession. However, the spark 
that ignited the secessionist 
movement was the Republican 
victory in the 1860 elections, 
^vith the selection of Abraham 
Lincoln as President. Fearing 
the loss of their rights as 
slaveholders, seven southern 
states seceded before Lincoln's 
inauguration on March 4, 1861, 
and formed the Confederate 
States of America with 
Jefferson Davis as President. 

Originally published in 
1859, this rare railroad map 
was overprinted, most likely 
between February and April 
1861, to show the first seven 
states to secede — South 
Carolina on December 20, 
1861, follo^ved by Mississippi, 
Florida, Alabama, Georgia, 
Louisiana, and concluding 

with Texas, February 1, 1861. 
This initial boundary of the 
Confederacy is marked by a 
heavy red line. 

Also depicted is the first 
flag of the Confederate States 
of America, the Stars and 
Bars with seven stars in a 
circle and three red and white 
stripes. It was placed over the 
state of Alabama, signifying 
Montgomery as the first capital 
of the Confederacy. After the 
Confederate attack on Fort 
Sumter in the Charleston 
harbor on April 12, four more 
southern states (Virginia, 
Arkansas, Tennessee, and 
North Carolina) joined the 
Confederacy. ♦ 

) 'k Sectwiialuun an^ Wejtern Expanj 



■ *■: ■ X. 

Charles M agnus 

N ew York, 1859. Printedmap, 17 x 21 inches. 





I— ( 


The Civil War was unlike any other conflict^h/US history. Fought 
completely on America soil, armies were mC^ successful when 
they had accurate knowledge of the terrain. The southern troops 
had an early advantage, not only because they had superior military 
leaders, but because most of the battles occurred on their home 
territory. Thus, they needed to wage a defensive campaign only. 
Reliable cartographic information was limited or absent 
and severely hindered the northern efforts, often resulting in 
high casualties. 

The war ^was all encompassing and every American had a personal 
stake in its course. Soldiers ^were recruited, supplied, trained, 
and transported. Casualties were high and many civilians came 
forward to care for the wounded. Those on the home front raised 
money, provided comfort and longed for ne^ws of their loved ones. 
Advances m technology, communication and transportation brought 
this information to them quickly and graphically. Visual images 
such as maps, photographs, cartoons and prints told the story as it 
unfolded. Traditional means such as letters, diaries and sketches 
also provided detailed accounts of the conflict. 




Terrain influenced strategies 
and often determined outcome. 
Knowledge of the landscape meant 
victory or defeat. There were few 
large-scale topographic maps of the 
theaters of war available to military 
strategists prior to engagement. 
These factors gave military leadership 
in the South an initial advantage, but 
the North created broad geographical 
strategies that would use its 
economic strengths, particularly the 
disruption of trade which included 
naval blockades, control of the 
Mississippi River, and destruction 
of supply routes. Both sides were 
determined to capture each other's 
capital. Although Washington, DC, 
■was threatened several times, the 
Confederate capital of Richmond 
remained an elusive goal until the 
■war's end. 

LIflli 100 

From today's perspective, many 
regard Vietnam as the first "living 
room " ■war, ■with evening television 
programs bringing the latest ne^ws 
to kitchen tables and living rooms 
across America. But the Civil War 
■was really the first! Just as ■we go 
online or ■watch CNN for immediate 
updates on the current conflict, those 
on the Civil War home front looked 
to ne^wspapers and magazines for 
current ne^ws on the ■war. The press 
told this story ■with ■words and images 
by publishing cartoons, photographs 
and sketches. Theater of ■war and 
battle maps allo^wed vie^wers to 
foUo^w troop progress. Personal 
communication, such as telegrams, 
soldiers' letters, and diaries, brought 
poignant accounts of ■war. 

Despite its physical distance from 
the actual fighting, many activities 
integral to the ■war effort happened 
in the Boston area. Recruitment 
of soldiers occurred right on the 
Boston Common. Soldiers and 
sailors ■were trained at Camp Meigs, 
near suburban Read^ville, and Fort 
Warren on one of the harbor islands. 
Armaments ■were made at the 
Waterto^wn and Charlesto^wn arsenals. 
Through letters, gifts, and ■visits, 
■wounded soldiers kne^w that those 
back home were doing everything 
possible to assist the Union cause. 



iTBt BllH*T ton T**r IT' 

IH4. HIH •ini mt HI* TIE HlklfT I1l4ty 

One of the major geographic 
strategies for both armies was 
the capture of the other's capital. 
Washington, DC, was situated 
precariously on the Potomac 
River, sandwiched between 
Maryland, a slave state which 

did not secede, and Virginia, one 
of the last slave states to secede. 
Consequently, Union troops 
constructed a ring of earthen 
forts around the city as a primary 
defense. Similarly, Confederate 
troops fortified Richmond with 
a ring of forts, as depicted on a 
map published in Boston. As a 
reminder to a northern audience 
that Richmond was the target, 
the publisher placed a series 
of concentric rings around the 
Confederate capital. 

Two political cartoons 
published by Currier & Ives 
also highlight the importance 
of this strategy. In the first, 
Gen.Winfield Scott, the first 
commander of the Union armies, 
is depicted as a fierce bulldog 
fronting the might of the North. 
Supported by supplies, munitions 
and financial resources, he taunts 
the sheepish greyhound "Jeff. " 
A great juicy bone labeled 
"Washington Prize Beef " lays 

between them, and Scott asks 
"Why don't you take it? " as 
the Confederate leader slips 
away with his tail between his 
legs toward his meager supply 
of cotton. 

The second cartoon, 
published during the 1864 
election year, contrasts the 
militaiy shortcomings of Gen. 
George McClellan, the second 
commander of the Union armies 
and the 1864 Democratic 
Presidential candidate, to the 
victories of his successor. Gen. 
Ulysses S. Grant. Portrayed as 
a bulldog. Grant sits on railroad 
tracks leading to Richmond, 
represented by a doghouse in 
w^hich Jefferson Davis cowers. 
Grant proclaims to Lincoln 
"I'm bound to take it. " Davis, 
surrounded by Generals Lee and 
Beauregard responds, "You ain't 
got this kennel yet old fellow, "-f 

31 ^ ^ Geography of Wat 

[Currier & Ives, after Frank T. Beard] 


N ew Y ork, 1861. L ithograph, 11 x 16 inches. Printout 

Currier & Ives 

N ew Y ork, 1864. L ithograph, 13.5 x 17.5 inches. Print Dqst. 

William H . Forbes 

B oston, 1863. Printed map, 25 x 19 inches. 


STllliLllOLl 01 THl iOOTH 


Two primary geographic 
objectives of Union military 
strategy were to blockade the 
southeastern coastline and 
gain control of the Mississippi 
River. By establishing a naval 
blockade of Confederate ports, 
the North planned to impede 
diplomatic and economic ties 
between the Confederacy 
and European nations. 
This blockade created an 
economic hardship by greatly 

diminishing the exportation 
of cotton and hindering 
the importation of military 
supplies. With Union armies 
occupjring the Mississippi 
River Valley the North split 
the Confederacy cutting off 
supply routes particularly from 
Texas and Arkansas. 

In order to demonstrate the 
progress of this strategy, the 
U.S. Coast Survey published at 
least seven maps with the same 
title, "Historical Sketch of the 
Rebellion, " each delineating 
new territory gained during 
the course of the war. By the 
time this version was published 
early in 1864, the North had 
gained control of the entire 
Mississippi River Valley, 
blocked most southern ports, 
and had made substantial 
progress in occup3ring much 
of the Texas, Georgia, South 
Carolina, North Carolina and 
Virginia coastal areas. 

This strategic plan 
originated in early 1861 when 
war was inevitable. Union 
Army General-in- Chief 
Winfield Scott, a man of great 
military reputation, devised the 
plan as a long-term strategy to 
crush the Confederacy, both 
economically and militarily 
Scott's tactic was dubbed 
the "Anaconda Plan, " as it 
was intended to constrict, as 
would a snake, the insurgent 
States. The plan was depicted 
graphically in an 1861 pictorial 
map published in Cincinnati. 
Although not prevalent during 
the Civil War, propaganda 
maps such as this were 
designed to have maximum 
emotional effect on the user, as 
more civilians became aware of 
-wartime activities. ♦ 

J.B. Elliott 


Cincinnati, \di6\. Priiitec) map, 16 x 21 inchej. 

Courtesy Lihrary of Congrejj, Geography aiic) 

Map Dwu'wn. 

94 • • Geography of Wai 

Henry Lmdenkohl 


Washington, DC, \di6A. Pniitei) map, 26 x 21 uichej. 


0001 MIPS OF fllillll mill 

V oil itdPii k n^^ r h, 

^ A^ 

TNtRmmiiwiiiatiui umtmt * 


■ « 

milMt 11 OJt IIITT, 

wm. i< HI u^ Hti If nii ( 

Am, ^ 

■ ■» 



• ■■■I 

' 1 


At the beginning of the war, 
few detailed topographic maps 
^vere available to officers for 
planning movements and 
engagements. In addition, 
some moderate-scale state 
maps, which could be used 
for planning broader regional 
strategies, were out-of-date. 
This was especially true for 
Virginia, where many of the 
battles were fought. 

Although this map, which 
^vas issued early in the war, 
claims to be accurate and 
current, these promotional 
statements are misleading. 
The title advertised it as the 
"official" state map based on 
"actual surveys" conducted 

in 1828 and 1859. In 
deconstructing this title, the 
map was not an official state 
publication; rather it was 
produced by a commercial 
firm located in Ne'w York 
City. The most recent official 
state map was published in 
1859, as suggested in the title, 
but that map was not based 
on comprehensive county by 
county surveys. Rather it 
was a hurried revision of the 
previous state map published 
in 1828. The earlier map 
incorporated surveys of 
individual counties, but those 
surveys were not consistent in 
scale or data collected. 

In emphasizing the map's 

accuracy, an endorsement 
suggests that this map was 
the "only" map used by Gen. 
Winfield Scott to plan his 
campaigns. Interestingly, a 
second edition that appeared 
after Scott's resignation -was 
revised to suggest that this ^vas 
the only map used by Gen. 
George McClellan to plan his 
campaigns. ♦ 

96 "^ "^ Geography of Wat 






- 1 
* I 


James T. Lloyd 


New York, 1861. Printer) map, 32 x 38 inche^i. 


HmEll PlOfllli MILITllY IlTlLLIillCl 

while this appears to be a 
fairly typical mid-19''' century 
railroad map, it was specifically 
commissioned by the War 
Department to provide current 
and accurate information 
about southern railroads. The 
map's story and its significance 
for military intelligence were 
recorded in a hand written note 
attached to the map, when the 
cartographer's -wido-w gave 
this copy to the Boston Public 
Library in 1907. 

,Ed / 1 ' . 

f*v^ /^W e^J*^ ^^'- ^■^^^ *"j^ 

,4?^^^ /^.rtZnt -^^rflSfe-^''^ 

-t-fj y. 

.A^^rO, -^-f f^ff^^ 

"During the Cu>d War . . . there woj needed at the Federal War 
Office in Wajhington more accurate mapd of the railroadd than 
any then available. ThoniaJ Kimber aj President of the Elmira 
and Williairuiport R.R. and a prominent member of the Board of 
Trade of Philadelphia wad applied to. He had a chart prepared. 
A copy of it wad hung in Secretary Stanton [i War Office and by 
black and red piM the varying poditioiu of the two armies were 
indicating. Thuf map waj abo lued by the general), especially 
by General Sherman in hid famous march through Georgia to 
the Sea. Upon one occcuion a question arose whether to make a 
coiuiderable detour or to take a short cut and avail themselves 
of a strip of railroad indicated on the chart but of which no 
one seemed to know otherwise. They trusted the chart, found it 
was correct and the hours thuj saved were of importance in the 
fortunes of war " 

"Thomas Kunber was a Quaker and to ease hi) conscience for 
having prepared such a map at all he declined any payment for 
it, but he accepted from the U.S. government twenty five copies 
of the chart, one of these I now have the pleasure of sending to the 
Boston Public Libraiy.'\ 

Mary L. Kimber, March 21, 1907. 

98 'A' 'A' Geography of Wai 


iLur u^r Mm 




Thomas Kimber 



Philadelphia, 1862. Printed map, 32 x 55 inches. 


O.i. COIST illlflY PllPlllS FOB Wll 

#f >-"r AfiJM^l^yn^ 

Because its administrators 
anticipated the war, the U.S. 
Coast Survey was one of the 
few agencies able to provide 
accurate nautical charts and 
topographic maps before and 
during the war. Leading the 
agency was Alexander Dallas 
Bache, the nation's foremost 
scientist and a great grandson of 
Benjamin Franklin. 

Founded in 1807, the 
agency's primary mission -was 
to chart the nation's coastal 
waters, and by the 1850s was 
beginning to produce detailed 
nautical charts for most of 
the Atlantic and Gulf coastal 
waters. In addition, Bache 
served as one of three members 
of the Blockade Strategy Board, 
which compiled Note^i on the 
Coadt of the United States), a series 
of eight secret reports providing 
sailing directions and detailed 
geographic information for the 
blockading Union squadrons. 

During the war, the agency's 
map and chart production 
increased four fold. 

An example of a Coast 
Survey chart issued during the 
war is one of South Carolina's 
Charleston Harbor published in 
1863. Utilizing an 1858 chart, 
based on detailed hydrographic 
and topographic surveys 
conducted in the early 1850s, 
this version was overprinted 
to show forts, "National" and 
"Rebel " trenches and batteries, 
and positions of the attacking 
fleet as of September 7, 1863. 
Of particular interest is the 
depiction of the Confederate- 
held Fort Wagner, and the 
adjacent Union trenches, 
where the Massachusetts 
SA^^, the African-American 
regiment led by Robert Gould 
Shaw, made its ill-fated but 
courageous assault on the fort, 
July 18, 1863.* 

1 00 "A" "A" Geography of Wai 

U.S. Coast Survey 


Washington, DC, 1863. Frintec) map, 29 x 22 inchej. 









During the war, commercial 
firms located in the North 
published a variety of war- 
related maps, primarily for the 
general public. One example 
is this colorful broadside 
published in New York City. 

Its small-scale map of the 
eastern United States does not 
identify the Confederate states 
as a separate nation, but it does 
reference the seceded states 
in blue and the border slave 
states which did not secede 
with yellow. However, the 
broadside provides much more 
information of popular interest 
than a general geographical 
delineation of a war- torn 

It was also a commemorative 
souvenir promoting northern 
patriotism. The marginal 
illustrations include portraits 
of 2 1 Union generals and 
commodores, as well as a 
variety of military memorabilia 
such as epaulettes and shoulder 
straps, chevrons, and swords. 
There are also three vignettes — 
one depicting fourteen soldiers 
dressed in a variety of Union 
uniforms, another illustrating 
the March 9, 1862 battle 

between the two ironclad ships 
Monitor and Merrimac, and the 
third, a symbolic representation 
of the Star-Spangled Banner 
flying gloriously over a 
battle scene. 

Another example, published 
in Boston, focused on the 
theater of war in Virginia and 
Maryland, where "the decisive 
battles for Union will be 
fought." As its title suggests, 
it was to be used by those 
following the progress of the 
war when they received news 
by telegram, a new technology 
which gained wide acceptance 
during the 1840s and 1850s 
along ^vith the nation's 
expanding railroad network. 
The small legend in the lower 
left also indicates that it was 
sold with colored pencils so that 
movements of the Union forces 
could be marked in red and 
those of the Rebel forces 
in blue.* 

102 • • La'ing Room Wai 


■^ Ensign, Bridgman & Fanning 


New York, 1863. Priiitei) map, 33 x 24 inchej. 

Louis Prang 


Boston, 1862. Pruited map, 38.5 x 24 uichej. 


lIll^i«lYl fllW OF Til SOPTHllST COlif 

These three separately- 
published bird's-eye views 
provide a continuous 
panoramic perspective of the 
southeastern United States 
coast, extending from the 
Chesapeake Bay to Florida. 
Published at the beginning of 
the war under the overall title, 
"Panorama of the Seat of War, " 
they were part of a six-part 
series which was intended to 
familiarize a general audience 
^vith the geography of the 
southern states. Using shading 
and pictorial symbols, they 
portray both the physical 
terrain and settlement patterns. 

especially major cities and 
to^vns, as well as roads and 

Together these three sheets 
highlight the naval blockade 
of the southeastern coast, 
especially showing pictorially 
coastal fortifications and ships 
lining the coast and entering 
major harbors. The other 
three sheets focused on the 
Mississippi Delta, the Texas 
coast, and the Kentucky- 
Tennessee theater of war. 
While not very useful for 
planning military maneuvers 
because of exaggerated 
topography and inconsistent 
scales, these large graphic 
representations were useful in 
assisting a living room audience 
to visualize the geographic 
areas where the battles would 
eventually occur. 

What is truly remarkable 
about these views is that 
they were apparently the 

-work of one artist, and he 
did not have the ability to 
observe such a large part of 
the country from an elevated 
perspective, other than in 
his creative imagination. 
They were created by John 
Bachmann, a Swiss born artist 
and lithographer. During the 
1850s he prepared some of the 
first bird's-eye views of major 
American cities, including one 
of Boston in 1850. After the 
war he continued to document 
America's largest cities, as 
bird's-eye views became 
a popular genre for other 
artists. -f 

104 • • LiAng Room Wai 

John Bachmann 


Ne'w York, 1861 . Printed map, 24 x 34 incheJ. 





During the Civil War, more 
than 2,000 maps appeared in 
Northern daily newspapers. In 
contrast to previous journalistic 
practices, this production 
represented a remarkable 
increase in number and 
variety. Prior to the war, maps 
rarely appeared in American 
ne-wspapers, and those that 
did tended to be small and 
diagrammatic. The expansion 
of railroad and telegraph 
networks and advances in 
printing technologies during 

the 1850s facilitated this 
revolution in journalistic 

These Civil War related 
newspaper maps ranged 
from large-scale plans of 
fortifications and battles to 
small-scale campaign and 
theater of war maps. This 
variety is well represented in 
an eight-page map supplement 
that was published by the 
New York Herald, Saturday, 
November 16, 1861. The 
supplement's front page 
displays a general reference 
map highlighting the naval 
blockade of the southeastern 
coast, -while the opposing page 
presents two more detailed 
maps depicting New Orleans 
and the Lo-wer Potomac. There 
are an additional fifteen maps 
in the supplement, including 
a large-scale depiction of 
Richmond and several plans of 
South Carolina fortifications. 

To broaden their coverage 
of the war, newspapers greatly 
expanded their press corps 
by adding correspondents to 
their payrolls. Consequently, 
an important component of 
army camps was the press, or 
as Harper'^ Weekly referred to 
them, the "newspaper brigade." 
In Thomas Nast's 1864 
engraving for the magazine, 
correspondents are depicted in 
numerous vignettes obtaining 
news from contrabands, 
embedded with soldiers on the 
field, and skeptically listening 
to "reliable information." 
For those reading //rtr/'^j/v 
Weekly back home, this view 
depicts the journalist's life 
at the front, and overall is a 
comprehensive representation 
of how the popular media 
covered the war.* 

106 • • LiAng Room Wai 


WAI# yAi^«H ANrfi |1|A«*NA,VI^ 

Hi 1011 in lEUfAiY nffiuniin it i ^um. 




N ovember 16, 1861. Nmspaper, 21 x 29 inches. 

Thomas N ast 

April 30, 1864. Bound periodical, 16x24 inches. RareBooia Dept. 


Extra! Extra! Maps & Front- Page Stories 


P ubiished on the front page 
0^ T he Nm York Times ten days 
after the battle, this schematic 
map accompanied an extensive 
article about the B attle of B alls 
Bluff, which occurred October 
21, 1861, on the banks of the 
Potomac R iver, about 30 miles 
westof Washington, DC. This 
rough sketch illustrates the 

nature of newspaper maps 
and their role in helping to 
inform the public, especially 
on the home front, of the war's 

W hat was supposed to be a 
diversionary maneuver while 
a larger U nion force moved 
against Confederate troops 
encamped near Leesburg, 
Virginia, resulted in a 
disastrous retreat for U nion 
troops, which included both 
the M assachusetts 15'^ and 20'^ 
regiments. The lack of good 
topographic information, which 
is almost totally lacking in this 
quickly prepared diagram, 
contributed to their defeat. 

N early a year later, the 
U nion and Confederate armies 
clashed in another battle in 
the same general area, but this 

time in Maryland, the first 

major battle in the N orth. This 
battle, known asAntietam 
Creek or Sharpsburg, occurred 
September 17, 1862, and is 
now recognized as the bloodiest 
one-day battle in American 
history, with approximately 
23,000 casualties. Accounts 
started to appear in northern 
newspapers two to three 
days after the battle. ne of 
the earliest map-illustrated 
articles was published in the 
Nefl/York Tribune, September 
19. Although this map did 
not attempt to depict the 
military action of the day, it 
did show the general location 
of Sharpsburg and the 
surrounding countryside along 
the upper Potomac R iver.* 

September 19, 1862. N&vspapa; 21 x 16inchs. 

108* -k Living Room War 

QII)C letto'lOorlf (uiiu^. 

miilUt UXiUU 

1^ IM ^ ^ T ^ ^ 

.Tnr^TTjaJ ; 


^ i 




^ ^>^ jT~_7B r" " ~ fe 

ctober 31, 1861. N&vspapff, 21 x 15 inches. 


The first major battle of the 
war occurred July 21, 1861, 
near Manassas, Virginia, an 
important railroad junction 
approximately 25 miles west 
of Washington, DC. Charged 
^vith defending the nation's 
capital. Union forces hoped 
to gain a quick victory. 
Anticipating that a Union 
victory would bring a speedy 
end to the war, citizens and 
congressmen from the nation's 
capital came in carriages with 
picnic lunches to watch the 

action. Unfortunately, the 
poorly trained Union troops 
suffered a humiliating defeat, 
and both sides realized that 
the war would not be resolved 

This battle was known 
by various names. For the 
Union army, which often 
named battles for nearby 
rivers or streams, it was the 
Battle of Bull Run, while the 
Confederates, who named 
battles for nearby towns, kne^v 
it as the Battle of Manassas. 
Another battle occurred in the 
same area, August 29-30, 1862, 
and subsequently was known 
as the Second Battle of Bull 
Run or Manassas. 

The battle is illustrated 
here with two very different 
after-battle maps. The first, 
published in Richmond, is 
one of only a few examples 
of battle maps produced 
by a commercial publisher 

^vithin the Confederacy. This 
relatively simple diagram used 
pictorial symbols and text to 
provide a detailed account 
of the battle. The second, 
prepared by a Union artillery 
officer, focused less on the 
battle action, but demonstrated 
its strategic importance to 
Washington, DC and the rail 
lines connecting the city to 
other Virginia locations. -f 

110* -k La'mqRc 

oofn War 


Solomon Bamberger 

Richmond, 186L Printed map, 9 x 11 inches. 

William F. Barry 
[New York, 1862] Printed map, 9x 12 inched. 




In addition to newspaper maps, 
commercially published battle 
maps were also available to 
folks on the home front for 
following the progress of the 
^var. A number of such maps 
^vere published by Boston 

firms. Appealing to a northern 
audience foUo'wing the Union 
army's attempts to gain control 
of Charleston, South Carolina, 
Boston publisher Louis Prang 
issued as least four undated 
variations of this small map of 
Charleston during the course 
of the war. 

With the Confederate 
bombardment and Union 
surrender of Fort Sumter, 
April 12-13, 1861, Charleston 
harbor was the site of the 
first major military action of 
the Civil War. Since the city 
remained under Confederate 
control throughout the 
war, it continued to be an 
objective of Union military 
strategy. Consequently, this 
map focused on Fort Sumter, 
which is surrounded by 
concentric circles at half-mile 
intervals, as if marking it a 
target for Union aggression. 
This particular edition was 

apparently published in 1863, 
documenting Union operations 
against Charleston defenses 
from April to September of 
that year. 

Also using a concentric-ring 
format, Boston publisher G.W 
Tomlinson issued a similar map 
of Petersburg, Virginia, near 
the end of the war. It depicted 
the Union siege, under the 
command of Gen. Ulysses S. 
Grant, of the vital railroad 
center of Petersburg. The map 
clearly delineated the elaborate 
trench network that both 
sides constructed during the 
campaign. The assault began 
in June 1864 and lasted for ten 
months, the longest sustained 
operation of the war.* 

\\2 "k "k Lii'ing Room Wai 

« I ■TiJ' ^ Uva^-=- 




G.W. Tomlinson 

Boston, 1864. Printed map, 19 x 14 inchej. 

W. A. Williams 


Boston, 1863. Printed map, 13 x 12.5 uichej. 


to those who ^vere determined 
to bring modern sensibihties to 
these undertakings including 
the newly formed United 
States Sanitary Commission. 

This 1863 map of a 
convalescent camp located 
four miles from Washington, 
DC, in Fairfax County, 
Virginia, reflects many of 
their objectives. Buildings 
are placed in an orderly 
manner -with efficient use 
of space and easy access for 
key personnel. In general, 
Casualties during the Civil War the Sanitary Commission 
^vere unprecedented with attempted to shape the hygiene 

620,000 dying— twice as many of camps, train nurses, create 
from disease as from battle hospital boats, form ambulance 

related injuries. The number corps and partner with other 

injured was also quite high and volunteer organizations such 
care of the wounded was an as the Christian Commission, 

important priority, particularly also pictured on the map. This 

site plan reflects the vision of 
the Sanitary Commission's 
Executive Secretary, Frederick 
Law Olmsted, who would 
become one of the great 
designers of public space in the 
post-bellum period. 

Those on the home front 
were eager to help in any way 
they could. For convalescing 
soldiers, the smallest gift might 
bring comfort. A pair of soft, 
^varm slippers would be most 
welcome. The sewing pattern 
was easily followed and for the 
price of a single postage stamp, 
they could be sent to a central 
location in Philadelphia 
and then distributed to those 
in need.* 

Henry C. Blair 


Philadelphia, \Si6\. Print, 14.5 x 12 uicheii. Coiirtejy Bojtoii Athenaeum. 

1 14 * * Liinng Room Win 

L. H. Russell 


Philadelphia, 1 863. Printed map, 28 x 23 uichej. 







' , 

— ^ 

a->m^w-^ k* 




- ■ 

.-, - »— . 


U^tan.— ^k 

n f1t-m . 



ft*! i j.m. — 

.£,^A: dk> JK. |.j m^ tiMit 

*_ .*A 




4<Al4 I** 

— 1-_ 

= *^J'r,- 

> *»_ Aj^.I 

Ju t^ ■■-■» - 



♦ ^ 


1 . 

1 ■ 

Julia Ward Howe's Battle 
Hymn of the Republic, which was 
w^ritten as an abolitionist poem, 
became very popular during 
the Civil War. After visiting 
a Union army camp near 
Washington, DC, in 1861, she 
^vas inspired by soldiers singing 

lyrics to a camp song that 
originated as a parody of John 
Brown, a soldier at Boston's 
Fort Warren and John Brown, 
the abolitionist. Howe's poem, 
^vhich easily fit the same tune, 
was first published in The 
Atlantic Monthly in February 
1862. Displayed here are the 
original lyrics that she recopied 
in 1901. 

Attesting to the song's 
popularity during the war is 
a woodcut print created by 
Winslo^v Homer for Harper'd 
Weekly. Entitled, "Songs of 
War, " the image displays a 
variety of wartime songs, but 
it is dominated by a vignette 
depicting a multitude of 
soldiers marching to war and 
singing the chorus "Glory 
Hallelujah." Religious fervor 
was common in 19''' century 
discourse. As the country 
divided, the rhetoric reflected 
the passion on both sides. 

The Battle Hymn of the Republic 
is a strong example of the 
juxtaposition of militancy and 
religion. Although a seeming 
departure from the pacifist 
Protestant reform spirit of the 
1830s and 1840s, clergy on 
both sides exhorted troops to 
show no mercy on their enemy 
as they sought justice. 

Julia Ward was part of this 
reform tradition. Her husband 
Samuel Gridley Howe was 
integral to the New England 
Transcendentalist movement. 
He applied his fierce beliefs 
to his work as director of the 
Perkins Institute for the Blind, 
originally located in South 
Boston. Together they edited 
the abolitionist ne-wspaper. 
The Commonwealth .* 

WQif "k Lii'ing Room Wai 

Winslow H omer 


N ew York, N ovember 23, 1861. Woodmgraving, 16x22inches. PrintDq)t. 

J ulia Ward H owe 


M arch 17, 1901. M anuscript, 13 x 11 inches. RareBook Dept 


iOliS OF Wll MOT IflTl lOlTH 1 SOOTH 

During the 19'*^ century, 
several factors led to the rise 
of printed sheet music. New 
printing technologies and 
commercialization contributed 
to inexpensive printing. 
Consequently, songs could 
be spread quickly after they 
^vere written, rather than 
gradually disseminated orally. 
These music scores were 
also very desirable because 
of the rise of the piano as a 
marker of middle class status. 
Prominently displayed in 
the parlor, the piano was a 
centerpiece of recreational 
life for a society which had 
increasing time for leisure 

As in so many other 
arenas, the production of 
music scores quickly shifted 
to wartime needs after the 
Confederate attack on Fort 
Sumter. Composers rapidly 
produced "Songs of War." 

These musical compositions, 
as illustrated by examples 
of sheet music published 
in Boston, highlighted 
the accomplishments 
of individuals such as 
Massachusetts-born Gen. 
Joseph Hooker, individual 
regiments including the 
Massachusetts 44^^, and 
military campaigns, notably 
the Battle of the Wilderness. 

Decorative covers were 
added to the printed scores 
to adorn and advertise the 
lyrics. These war-time covers, 
which display powerful visual 
images, convey the glory and 
struggle of the conflict. They 
told those on the home front 
of the soldiers' affections, the 
causes for which they fought, 
and the ne'er do wells they 

Augusto Bendelari 
Boston, 1864. A'huiLC jcore, 14 X 11 inched 
Music Dept. 

bw« t|i|iint« 1i'l«1 


Laura Hasting Hatch 
Boston, 1870. Miuic score, 14 X 11 inchcj. 
Music Dept. 

1 18 • • LiAng Room Wai 

B. Arlington 


B oston, n.d. M usic score, 14 x 11 inches. M usicDept. 


lOPli' LlTTlli HOMl 

i*¥iA t^^ Hffpct 

Invaluable insights about 
military life and detailed eye- 
witness accounts of individual 
battles can be gleaned from 
letters that soldiers sent to loved 
ones at home, such as those 
written by Boston resident 
Henry Ropes. While a student 

at Harvard and during the 
early years of the war, Henry 
wrote extensive letters to his 
father and brother. His letters, 
often three and four pages in 
length, occasionally included 
rough sketch maps of individual 
battles, including one that 
he drew of Fredericksburg, 

On November 25, 1862, 
Henry was commissioned as 
a Second Lieutenant with the 
20*'" Massachusetts Volunteers, 
which headquartered at Fort 
Benton near PoolesvUle, 
Maryland. Ropes' last letter 
was dated June 27, 1863, as 
his unit was marching north 
to Gettysburg. There are no 
more letters, since he was fatally 
^vounded by friendly fire on the 
morning of the third and final 
day of the battle. The last item 

in the volume is a rough sketch 
map prepared in October 1863 
by his brother John, noting 
"H.R died here." 

In the accompanying carte 
de vbite, we see Lt. Ropes in 
his dress uniform, complete 
with cape and surrounded by 
artillery. The carte de vbite, a 
popular item during the Civil 
War, was an inexpensive 
and simple way to obtain 
photographs to send home. 
These small albumen prrnts, 
whrch were mounted on 
sturdy cards, were created in 
a standard format that could 
be sent through the marl 
without damage. Overall, such 
images evoke an arr of milrtary 
professronalrsm and herorsm, 
and would no doubt 
be treasured by recipients 
back home.* 

John Adams Whipple 


Boston, [ca.l862]. Carte de vLiite, 2.5 x 4 uichej. Print Dept. 

120* -k LiAnijRi 

oofn War 


H enry C. Ropes 

Accompanying letter to J ohn C. Ropes, December 18, 1862. LAt& book, 10 x 7 inches. RareBookDept. 

; J ohn C. Ropes 

ctober 1863. M anusaipt map, 7x10 inches. RareBook Dept. 


COL. PlLFllY 1 THl lOTH MliSlCHllilTTi 

Among the true treasures of 
the Boston Pubhc Library is 
a painting by artist Winslo^v 
Homer, entitled Officers at 
Camp Benton, Maryland, 1861. 
Commissioned twenty years 
after the event, it portrays 

Capt. William Bartlett and Lt. 
Col. Francis W. Palfrey of the 
20'*" Massachusetts Volunteers 
at their camp near Poolesville, 

Painted mostly from 
photographs at the request 
of a retired Colonel Palfrey, 
the image resembles an 1862 
photograph, uniquely framed 
with epaulettes from his 
uniform. The photograph, 
which shows Palfrey and 
several other officers standing 
near a cabin at Antietam, may 
have served as the basis for this 
canvas. Although not executed 
while Homer was in situ as 
artist-correspondent, the work 
exhibits the same qualities of 
introspection and longing that 
are characteristic of many of 
his wartime subjects. 

This photograph, his sword, 
and a prayer book are several 
of the more unusual items 
found among the Civil War 

related artifacts and books 
saved and collected by Palfrey. 
The prayer book, ^vhich is 
inscribed with Palfrey's initials, 
reportedly saved his life by 
stopping a bullet -when he was 
wounded at Antietam. 

Palfrey's widow donated 
his collection to the Boston 
Public Library in 1892. These 
materials form the cornerstone 
of the 20''' Regiment Collection, 
which continues to be funded 
by residue moneys contributed 
by the 20''' Massachusetts 
Regiment Association for the 
installation of the Louis Saint- 
Gaudens lions on the landings 
of the Library's grand stair 

\22 "k "k Lii'ing Room Wai 

Wmslow Homer 


Ca. 1 88 1 . Oil mi canmij, 32 x 46 iiichej. Rare Book Dept. 

Rare Book Dept, 



_ 1 1 ' 


i ^ 

Among the most unique and 
interesting Civil War maps are 
relatively unkno^vn manuscript 
maps drawn by individual 
soldiers during the war. 
Intended for a very limited and 
personal audience, such maps 
can be discovered in a variety 
of media, including daily 

journals, letters home, or even 
autograph books. 

For example, Joseph 
F. Dean with the 44th 
Massachusetts Regiment sent 
several letters to his mother, 
Mrs. H.C. Dean in Boston. 
These letters, dated in 1862 
and 1863, were sent from 
Camp Stevenson near New 
Bern, North Carolina, where 
the regiment was stationed. 
Among the rough sketch maps 
that he included with his letters 
IS one sho^ving the location of 
New Bern at the juncture of 
the Trent and Neuse Rivers. 
The town fell to Union forces 
March 14, 1862, and remained 
under Union control until the 
end of the war. 

A more unusual source 
for a manuscript map is an 

autograph book, -which soldiers 
sometimes assembled as 
personal mementoes of their 
fellow combatants. In this 
interesting example, there is a 
very finished drawing of the 
Military Prison at Johnsons 
Island, Lake Erie, where 
Confederate Officers were 
confined as prisoners of war. 
This map was prepared by 
James Hogane, a Confederate 
engineer, at the request of 
his fellow officer, Joseph 
Barbaire, a captain with the 
1 St Alabama. This autograph 
book, which was intended as 
a gift for Barbaire s six-year 
old daughter LuLu, included 
autographs, short notes, 
poetry, several carte ?e t'ijitej, 
and t-wo maps.* 

Joseph F. Dean 


Accompanjnng letter to Mrs. Harriett C. Dean, March 22, 1863. /Maniijcript map, 5 x 8 uiche^i. Rare Book Dept. 

124 -k -k LiAng Room Wai 

'-i>X y*'/***— *# _^f^ ^^kmrt i 

<"<^*^f- ^ 

.^ y^ 



r '* 

Capt. James T. Hogane 



June 18, 1862. Maiiujcript map, 7 x 11 Inchu. Rare Book Dcpt. 


lOSTOl'i mi 1 WOMll llLIfll 


Although no battles were 
fought in Boston, many 
people in greater Boston were 

heavily involved in war-related 
activities. The accompanying 
map portrays Boston and its 
neighboring communities at 
the end of the war. With a 
population of 180,000, Boston 
was the largest city in New 
England, and the fifth largest 
in the United States. Using 
this map, it is possible to locate 
many of these war-related 

A crucial activity -was the 
recruitment of young men to 
serve as soldiers. In 1862, 
President Lincoln called for 
300,000 new volunteers to 
serve for three years; within a 
month he requested another 
300,000 men to serve for 
nine months. Consequently, 
recruiting committees were 
hard at work, as depicted 
in an 1862 print sho'wing a 
recruiting station on Flag 
Staff Hill in Boston Common. 
In this illustration. Union 

soldiers converse with potential 
recruits as part of an extensive 
grass-roots recruiting effort. 
Massachusetts heard the 
President's call and filled its 
quota. A monument dedicated 
to Massachusetts soldiers and 
sailors who perished in the 
Civil War now stands at this 
same site on the Common. 

Young women also played 
an important role in supporting 
the troops. As was customary, 
some ladies' groups made 
regimental flags, which were 
presented to the troops with 
great ceremony and fanfare. 
This 1861 photograph shows 
women in Roxbury, sewing 
a flag for the local volunteer 
regiment. Miss Clara May 
Crosby offered the hand- 
made ensign to the Roxbury 
volunteers in April 1 86 1 as 
recorded in the Roxbury 
City Gazette. ■*■ 

126 • • Bo^ftmi Engine of Wai 





Henry F. Walling 

New York, 1866. Printei) map, 62 x 62 inches. 

J.H. Bufford 
Boston, September 22, 1862. Lithograph, 14 x 11.5 iiichej. Print Dept. 

Ca. 1861. Silver print, 9 x 11 inchej. Rare Book Dept. 


A number of government 
facilities in the Boston area 
were devoted to war-related 
activities. Among these was 
Camp Meigs, a training center 
near Readville, now part of 
Hyde Park. Constructed 
as a temporary facility, 
numerous Massachusetts 
regiments trained here before 
being deployed to the battle 
front. One of these was the 
Massachusetts 54th led by Col. 
Robert Shaw, the first black 
regiment enlisted by any state 
during the war. 

The forts that had been 
constructed during the first 
half of the 19th centuiy on 
various islands as part of 
the Boston Harbor defenses 
were also mobilized for the 
war effort. One example 
is Fort Warren, which was 
strategically located on 
Georges Island. Constructed 
in 1833, this massive 

pentagonal fortification served 
as a prison for Confederate 
officers. It was also used to 
train new recruits. An 1861 
engraving from Harper'^ Weekly 
provides a view of the fort 
from the harbor, as well as 
an interior view with soldiers 
performing exercises. 

Another important facility 
was the Federal arsenal in 
Watertown. Established in 
1816 for the receipt, storage, 
and issuance of weaponry, 
it expanded its production 
capabilities during the war, as 
depicted in an 1861 engraving 
by Boston-born artist 
Winslow Homer. In the lower 
vignette, men fill cartridges 
^vith powder, w^hile in the 
upper scene women insert the 
bullets. The Arsenal produced 
materials for the -war around 
the clock, and employed nearly 
300 workers during the height 
of production. ♦ 

128 • • Bojton Engine of Wai 




. * k .. 4.*. 


- I ■ 



U.S. Army, Office of Quartermaster General 


N.d. Maniijcript map, 28 x 19. 5 inchej. Courtejy Natwnal Archwej and Recorch Aitmuiuitratwii. 

Ne'w York, December 7, 1861. Wood engraving with banc) coloring, 16 x 11 mchej. Print Dept. 

■*" Winslow Homer 


New York, July 20, 1861. Wood engraving, 16 x 11 iiichej. Print Dept. 




How do we remember something? What images hnger? And how 
do these visual recollections affect our memory of events? 

How we choose to tell the story of the war that almost dissolved 
our nation suggests its magnitude, importance and centrality in 
our collective and individual memories. Visual images comprise 
an important part of this narrative. As technology improved 
during the second half of the 19th century, the ability to create and 
disseminate memorable images expanded greatly. What the viewer 
understood or remembered varied, but the presence of a common 
visual experience was part of the formation of a collective culture 
with a shared sensibility. 

Yet different memories of the same events persist, leading to 
conflicting interpretations of the past. What is consistent is the 
need to remember, and to find some ^way to honor and thank those 
who, as Lincoln proclaimed, sacrificed their lives "to that cause for 
which they gave the last full measure of devotion. " 



Few events have loomed larger 
in the history of the war or our 
nation's memory than the three-day 
battle of Gettysburg m southern 
Pennsylvania m July 1863. But 
how has that turning point been 
remembered? We have Lincoln's 
w^ords, Brady's photographs, and as 
■was common practice, maps drawn 
after the battle. These maps of 
Gettysburg were drawn under the 
auspices of an increasingly powerful 
Federal government, and subject to a 
pervasive call for common standards. 

Given the magnitude of the war, 
there was a strong desire to honor 
both individuals and groups that had 
participated. Enduring memorials, 
often constructed of stone or bronze, 
indicate the conflict's lingering 
presence for the generations that 
followed. Each locality in the United 
States emphasizes its contribution 
and loss. In this exhibition, we 
pay special attention to a number 
of Boston heroes, including three 
Massachusetts regiments especially 
as they are remembered on the 
Boston Common and m the Boston 
Public Library. 




These photographs of the 
Gettysburg battlefield were 
selected from an album 
attributed to Mathew Brady, 
the noted Civil War-era 
photographer. Because of his 
initiatives in documenting the 
war through photography 
still in its infancy he is 
recognized as the father of 

Photographs by Brady and 
other early photographers 
provided the general public 
with its most graphic 

impression of the Gettysburg 
battle. Because of limited 
technology, none of these 
photographs were taken during 
the actual battle. In addition 
most were not taken by Brady 
himself, but by his team of 
unrecognized assistants, or 
by competing photographers 
who had formerly been 
his associates. 

For example, one of the 
battle's most memorable images 
depicts a "rebel sharpshooter 
at Devil's Den." It was shot 
by Timothy O'SuUivan, who 
arrived at Gettysburg two 
days after the battle ended. 
Modern research indicates that 
the body and rifle (not one 
used by sharpshooters), were 
also photographed at another 
location, suggesting that 
they were most likely moved 
to Devil's Den, a protected 
site used by Confederate 

Brady and his team did not 
arrive in the Gettysburg area 
until two weeks after the battle. 
Since the bodies had been 
removed, they concentrated 
on documenting prominent 
cultural and physical land 
marks. One of these images 
illustrates Little and Big Round 
Top, two rocky hills where 
Confederate troops made an 
unsuccessful assault on the 
Union left flank on the second 
day of the battle. ♦ 

132 "k "k -k Gettyjhiirq 

Timothy O Sullivan 


[Gettysburg, PA, July 5, 1863]. Allnimen print, 6.5 x 9 inches. Rare Book Dept. 

Mathe-w Brady 


[Gettysburg, PA, ca. July 16, 1863]. ALbiuneii print, 6x 7 inchej. Rare Book Dept. 



This isometric or bird's- 
eye view depiction of the 
Gettysburg battlefield was 
not only one of the first 
cartographic representations 
published after the battle, 
it was also one of the most 
visually appealing. Despite its 
rapid production within less 
than a year after the battle, 
its compilation was based 
on substantial research and 
provided a reportedly accurate 
portrayal of the military 

action and battle ground. Its 
accuracy is confirmed by the 
promotional endorsements of 
Gen. George G. Meade, nine 
Union officers, and four local 
residents printed within the 
bottom margin. 

One individual, John 
Badger Bachelder, a resident 
of Boston's Hyde Park 
suburb, was responsible for its 
compilation and publication. 
Before the war, he worked 
as a military instructor, 
historian, and artist. As 
hostilities began, he decided 
to follow the war so that 
he could document its one 
decisive battle. He arrived at 
Gettysburg as the dead still lay 
on the ground. He spent 84 
days traversing the battlefield, 
sketching its topography and 
interviewing convalescing 
Confederate soldiers. Union 
officers, and local residents in 
order to gather information for 

his meticulously-researched 

Bachelder devoted the 
remainder of his life preparing 
the written and illustrated 
history of this one battle. 
These efforts included a 
painting of Longstreet's 
assault, a battlefield guide- 
book, a 2,500 page manuscript 
history of the battle, and 
service as director of the 
Gettysburg Battlefield 
Memorial Association. For 
his services in the historical 
delineation of the battle, 
the citizens of Gettysburg 
presented him a scale model 
of a cannon made of shot 
and shells collected from the 
battlefield. The cannon is now 
maintained by the Hyde Park 
Historical Society. ♦ 

134 * * * Gettyjhiiri) 




John B. Bachelder 


Boston and New York, 1863. Printed map, 28 cc 42 inched. Rare Book Dept. 


1886. Cannon and caLuon, 32 x 36 x 60 inched. Coiirtejy Hyde Park HLitoncal Society at the Hyde Park Branch, BoJton Public Library. 





twb- 14 




FoUo^ving the European 
military tradition of preparing 
after-battle maps for major 
military conflicts, U.S. Army 
Engineers prepared detailed 
battle maps of most major 
battles shortly after the -war. 

However, the official surveys of 
Gettysburg ^vere not conducted 
until 1868-69, and the resulting 
maps were not published until 
1876. In comparison to other 
battle maps, this set is quite 

First, its production resulted 
from the collaboration of a 
civilian, John Bachelder, and 
a team of Army surveyors 
under the direction of noted 
map maker, Gen. G.K. Warren. 
Second, the topographic 
surveys were so detailed that 
the original base map was 
dra-wn at a scale of 1 inch equals 
200 feet, while the reduced, 
published map -was issued at a 
scale of 1 inch equals 1,000 feet. 
Relief was depicted by four- foot 
contours and shading, which 
highlights the terrain. Today's 
U.S. Geological Survey maps, 
^vhich are not nearly as detailed, 
are scaled at linch equals 2,000 
feet, and generally employ 

1 or 20 foot contours, rarely 
accentuated ^vith shading. 

Finally, there were three 
maps, rather than one, 
representing the positions 
and movements of the armies 
during the course of the battle. 
Confederate troops were 
depicted in red, while Union 
troops appear in blue. In 
addition, officers were named, 
regiments were identified, and 
movements were indicated 
by dashed lines. This detail 
was thoroughly researched by 
Bachelder in the days following 
the battle when he interviewed 
Union officers and convalescing 
Confederate prisoners. 
According to Bachelder, 
who also served as the maps' 
publisher and distributor, these 
maps were "pronounced more 
elaborate and complete than 
any battle maps ever published 
in this or any other country. "♦ 

1 36 'A' "k "k Gettyjhiirq 


U.S. Army, Chief of Engineers, and John B. Bachelder 


Washington, DC, and Boston, \d>76. Pnntei) map, 37 x 31 iiichej. Rare Book Dept. 


oil MIPS OF ilTTYilPli 

Our memory of the war's most 
significant battle is reinforced 
by more than 1 50 battle maps 
that were published in the 

years foUo^ving the battle. 
One of the most unusual 
is an untitled and undated 
diagram that provides an 
unconventional fish-eye or 
360-degree panoramic view of 
the battlefield. In the center 
of this circular, pictorial 
diagram is a numbered legend 
identifying 57 landmarks, 
locations of specific regiments, 
or sites of selected casualties. 
Representative of a typical 
after-battle plan is a small 
map prepared by Charles 
Reed, a participant in the 
battle. Published the year 
after the battle, it suggests the 
relative positions of Union 
forces in black and Rebel 
forces in red, primarily on the 
second and third days of the 
battle. Topography is crudely 

represented by hachures, with 
only major roads delineated. 

Reed, a native of 
Charlestown, Massachusetts, 
enlisted in the 9th 
Massachusetts Battery as a 
bugler. Educated in Boston 
area schools, he worked 
independently as an illustrator 
and lithographer before the 
^var. During his ^var-tlme 
experience, he recorded what 
he observed in sketch books 
and embellished letters to 
his parents, now preserved 
in the Library of Congress. 
After the war his illustrations 
appeared in The Bo<iton Globe 
and several Civil War-related 
publications. ♦ 

Charles W. Reed 


[Boston], 1864. Printec) map, 15 X 12 iiichej. 

138 •• • Gettyjhurq 


Ca. 1866. Printeil map, 16 x 16 inchej. 



One of Boston's major 
Civil War commemorations 
devoted exclusively to the 
Battle of Gettysburg ^vas the 
construction of a specially 
designed Cyclorama Building, 

^vhich premiered ^vith Paul 
Philippoteaux's 360-degree 
panoramic painting of the 
Battle of Gettysburg. On 
display from 1884 to 1889, it 
depicted Pickett's Charge, the 
failed Confederate infantry 
assault on Union lines, which 
was considered the climax of 
the three-day battle. 

Cycloramas, panoramic 
paintings mounted on a 
cylindrical surface, were very 
popular during the last half of 
the 19th century. French artist 
Philippoteaux, and his father 
Henri created a number of 
cycloramas depicting European 
military scenes before Paul 
came to the United States. 
He first created a Gettysburg 
cyclorama in Chicago, but then 
prepared similar panoramas 
for Boston, Brooklyn, and 

Boston's Cyclorama Building 
was located on Tremont Street 

and IS currently the home of 
the Boston Center for the Arts. 
The cycloramas location is 
depicted in an 1888 Bromley 
real estate atlas. A set of eight 
photographs, one of which 
is illustrated here, recorded 
the dramatic appearance of 
the Boston display. After 
remaining in storage for many 
years, the Boston painting was 
moved to Gettysburg in 1913. 
The painting, which has been 
rehoused and restored several 
times, is still displayed in the 
National Park Service's new 
visitor's center and museum. -f 

140 * * * Gettyjhurq 


1 » »ry I r 

jW ll ^ Ml ^ 



George W. Bromley 


Philadelphia, 1888. At/aJ dheet, 22 x 32 inchej. 

■< Paul Dominique Philippoteaux 

[detail from CYCLORAMA of the battle of GETTYSBURG] 

[Boston, ca. 1884]. Photograph, 10 x 8 iiichcj. Rare Book Dept. 


This map of the Boston 
Common and Pubhc Garden 
from an 1888 real estate atlas 
reminds us that this public 
space has become a place 
to remember and honor the 
city's past, dating back to the 
colonial- era Burying Ground. 
During the 1 9'*' century several 
monuments commemorating 
Civil War-related statesmen and 
heroes, including the Sumner 
and Everett Statues and the 
Soldiers Memorial, were added 

to the growing inventory. 

The Sumner statue, located 
on the south side of the PubKc 
Garden, honors Charles 
Sumner, U.S. Senator, orator, 
and staunch abolitionist. In the 
Senate, he spoke against the 
institution of slavery, including 
a stern speech titled "The Crime 
against Kansas" directed toward 
the authors of the Kansas- 
Nebraska Act. Noted sculptor 
Thomas Ball was commissioned 
to create Sumner's memorial. 
The bronze statue, which stands 
nine feet tall, sits on a square 
granite pedestal inscribed ^vith 
only the subject's last name. 
It was unveiled in December 
1878, with very little formality. 

The Everett statue, erected 
on the north side of the Public 
Garden in 1 867, commemorates 
Ekl-ward Everett, noted orator 
and U.S. Senator. The statue 
was relocated to Dorchester 
in 1911. 

Everett, pictured here in 
an undated portrait, was an 
anti-slavery advocate, but as 
a member of the Whig party, 
worked tirelessly to protect the 
already unstable Union. On 
November 19, 1863, before a 
captivated audience, Everett 
delivered his two-hour oration 
at the dedication of Gettysburg's 
National Cemetery, but 
his speech was eclipsed by 
President Lincoln's three- 
minute "address. "♦ 

142 "k "k -k Bojton Reinemhe 





II* 1 

i • I' 






M M 






/PLAN or 


George W. Bromley 


Philadelphia, 1 888 . AtLu jheet, 22 x 32 inchej. 

N.d. Etching, 11 x 8.5 inchej. Print Dcpt. 

[Boston, ca. 1878]. Photograph, 7 x 4.5 inchej. Fine Artj Dept. 


Um ^4 

In 1866, the City of Boston 
assembled a committee to plan 
and erect a monument on the 
Boston Common in honor of 
the Union soldiers and sailors 
^vho died during the Civil War. 
The committee accepted a 

design proposal from Martin 
Milmore, an Irish sculptor 
who moved to Boston in 1851 
and -worked in the studio of 
noted Boston artist Thomas 
Ball. It took eleven years to 
bring the project to completion, 
^vith Milmore spending five 
years in Rome working on the 

As depicted in a 
contemporary print, the 
completed monument is 
composed of a single column 
topped with a copper figure 
representing the "Genius of 
America, " reaching a height of 
72 feet. At its base stand four 
statues of classically dressed 
women symbolizing North, 
South, East, and West. Below 
them are four additional figures 
that depict the Army, Navy, 
History, and Peace; the first 
two figures are dressed in 
service uniforms and the last in 
classical style. Between these 

figures are bas-relief plaques 
showing the soldiers departing 
for war, soldiers returning 
from battle, the Navy, and 
the Boston branch of the U.S. 
Sanitary Commission. 

The Soldiers' and Sailors' 
Monument, also known as the 
Army and Navy Monument, 
was erected on a high elevation 
known as Flag Staff Hill. 
The dedication took place 
September 17, 1877, and was 
preceded by a large parade, 
which is illustrated by the 
accompan3ring map. 
It delineates the proposed 
parade route and enumerates 
the large contingent of soldiers, 
sailors, statesmen, and cadets 
who marched through the 
Back Bay neighborhood to the 
Boston Common. ♦ 

\44 "k "k -k Bojton Reinemhe 

Horace McMurtrie 


Boston, \9>77 . Printed map, 17 x 32 uuhej. 

•< Joseph B. Richards 


Boston, 1 877. Lithograph, 24 x 19 iiichej. Fine Artj Dept. 


During the last decade of 
the 19* century, two more 
important sculptures were 
added to the city's growing 
list of Civil War monuments 
— one on the Boston Common 
facing the State House and 
the other at the Boston Public 
Library. They were created by 
the nation's premier sculptor 

Augustus Saint- Gaudens and 
his brother Louis. 

The former, designed 
by Augustus, is known as 
the Shaw Memorial. It 
immortalizes the brave soldiers 
of the all black Massachusetts 
54th Volunteer Infantry and 
their colonel, Robert Shaw, 
who gained recognition for 
their ill-fated attack on Fort 
Wagner near Charleston, 
South Carolina, July 18, 1863. 
This bronze relief, measuring 
11x14 feet, depicts three 
rows of fully equipped soldiers 
marching off to battle, with an 
impressive equestrian statue of 
Shaw in the foreground. The 
monument took fourteen years 
to finish and was unveiled May 
31, 1897. It was restored in 
1981, when the names of those 

soldiers killed in action 
were added. 

The other memorial, 
designed by Augustus' brother 
Louis, consists of twin lions 
mounted on either side of the 
grand stair case at the new 
Boston Public Library at 
Copley Square, which opened 
to the public in February 
1895. Louis carved two large 
reclining lions from solid 
blocks of unpolished Sienna 
marble. One is dedicated to 
the 2nd Massachusetts and 
the other honors the 20th 
Massachusetts, also known 
as the Harvard Regiment. 
Directly below the lions' paws 
are lists of the battles in which 
each regiment took part.* 

[Boston, ca. 1895]. Silver print, 9.5 x 7,5 iiichej. Print Dept. 

146 "k "k -k Bojton Rememhc 

[Boston, ca. 1897]. Photograph, 7.5 x 9.5 Liicho. Fiiie Arid Dept. 



Black, Jeremy. A'lapj aiic) PoLttcj. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997. 

Bolster, W. Jelfrey and Hilary Anderson. Sol(hei\i, Sadoiv, Slavej, aiu) Ship^i: The Civd War Photographs of Henry P. Moore. 
Concord, NH: New Hampshire Historical Society, 1999. 

Bosse, David C. Civil War Newspaper Alapj: A HLitorwal Atlaj, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1993. 

. Cu'il War Newspaper Maps: A Cartohihliography of the Northern Daily Press. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1993. 

Cowles, Calvin D., comp. Atlas to Accompany the Official Recorcis of the Union and Confederate Armies. 
Washington, DC; Government Printing Office, 1891-1895; reprint. New York: Barnes and Noble, 2003. 

Faust, Drew Gilpin. Thui Republic of Snffiruig: Death and the American Civil War. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2008. 

Fernandez, Mark F, "Mapping Louisiana in the Nineteenth Century, "pp. 163-243, m Mapping Louisiana: Five Hundred Years of Maps. 
Edited by Alfred E. Lemmon, John T. Magill, Jason R. Wiese, and John R. Hebert. New Orleans: Historic New Orleans Collection, 

Frassanito, William A. Antietani: the Photographic Legacy of America s Bloodiest Day. New York: Scribner, 1 978. 

. Gettysburg: Then and Now : Touring the Battlefield with Old Photos, 1865-1889. Gettysburg, PA: Thomas Publications, 1996. 

Gelman, Barbara. The Wood Engravings of Winslow Homer. New York: Crown Publishing, 1969. 

Grim, Ronald E. "Building Virginia: The Antebellum Years, " pp. 1 19-187 in Virginia in Maps: Four Centuries of Settlement, Growth, and 
Development. Edited by Richard W. Stephenson and Marianne M. McKee. Richmond: Library of Virginia, 2000. 

Ham, Debra Newman, ed. The African-American Mosaic: A Library of Congress Resource Guide for the Study of Black Histoiy and Culture. 
Washington, DC: Library of Congress, 1993. 

Holland, Robert A. The MLisissippi River in Maps and Views: From Lake Itasca to the Gulf of /Mexico. New York: Rizzoli International, 2008. 

Kagan, Hilde Heun, ed. The American Heritage Pictorial Atlas of United States Huitory. New York: American Heritage Publishing, 1966. 

Knowles, Anne Kelly. "What Could Lee See at Gettysburg," pp. Ilib-IGb, in her Placing Histoiy: How Maps, Spatial Data, and GIS are 
Changing Huitorical Scholarship. Redlands, CA: ESRI Press, 2008. 

McElfresh, Earl. "Mapping and Robert E. Lee's Gettysburg Campaign," The Portolan, no. 78 (Fall 2010), pp. 26-36. 

. Maps and Mapmakers of the Civil War. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1999. 

Mcllwraith, Thomas F. and Edward K. MuUer, eds. North America: The Hutorical Geography of a Changuig Contuient. 
2"'' ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2001. 

McKee, Marianne. "From Contracts to Copperplates: The Making of the 1827 State Map of Virginia, the Corrections in 1859, 
and the Copperplate Printing Project of 2004," The Portolan, no. 78 (Fall 2010), pp. 13-25. 

McPherson, James M. The Atlas of the Civil War. New York: Macmillan, 1994. 

. Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. 

Meinig, Donald W. The Shaping of America: A Geographical Perspective on 500 Years of Hutory. 
3 vols. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986-1998. 


Miller, Richard ¥. Harvard'j Cwd War: A Huitory of the Twentieth MiusachiuietLi Volunteer Infanti-y. 
Hanover, MA: University Press of New England, 2005. 

Miller, William Ct . Mapping for Stonewall: The Cii'il War Service of Jed Hotchkuu. Washington, DC: Elliott & Clark Publishing, 1993. 

National Ocean Suri'ey Cartohihliography Cn'il War Collection . Rockville, MD: National Ocean Survey, Physical Science Services Branch, 
Map Library, 1980. 

Nelson, Christopher. Mapping the Civil War: Featuring Rare Mapj from the Lihrai-y of CongreM. 
Washington, DC: Starwood Publishing, 1992. 

O'Connor, Thomas H. Cii'il War Boston: Home Front and Battlefield. Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1997. 

O'Reilly, Noel S., David C. Bosse, and Robert W. Karrow, Jr. Civil War Maps: A Graphic Index to the Atlas to Accompany the Official Records 
of the Union and Confederate Armies. The Hermon Dulap Smith Center tor the History of Cartography Occasional Publication No. 1. 
Chicago: The Newberry Library, 1987. 

PauUin, Charles O. and John K. Wright. Atlas of the Historical Geography of the United States. Washington, DC and 
New York: Carnegie Institution and American Geographical Society, 1932. 

Schulten, Susan. "The Cartography of Slavery and the Authority of Statistics," Civil War Hutory, 56, no. 1 (2010): 5-32. 

. "Mapping American History," pp. 159-205 \nMaps: Fuiduig Our Place in the World. Edited by James R. Akerman and 

Robert W. Karrow, Jr. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007. 

Siebert, Wilbur H. The Underground Railroad from Slavery to Freedom. 1898; New York: Russell and Russell, 1967. 

Sneden, Robert Knox. Eye of the Storm: A Civil War Odyssey. Edited by Charles F. Bryan, Jr. and Nelson D. Lankford. 
New York: Free Press, 2000. 

Stephenson, Richard W. comp. Civd War Maps: An Annotated Lut of Maps and Atlases in the Library of Congress. 
Washington, DC: Library of Congress, 1989. 

Stephenson, Richard W., "An Unfamiliar Country: The Commonwealth during the Civil War," pp. 189-245, in Virginia m /Maps: Four 
Centuries of Settlement, Growth, and Development. Edited by Richard W. Stephenson and Marianne M. McKee. 
Richmond: Library of Virginia, 2000. 

The Shaw Memorial: A Celebration of an American Masterpiece. Cornish, NH: Eastern National, 2002. 

Underground Railroad. Washington, DC: National Park Service, Division of Publications, 1998. 

U.S. National Archives. A Guide to the Civil War Maps in the National Archives. Washington, DC: National Archives 
Trust Fund Board, 1986. 

Vavra, Luke A. "J.T Lloyd's Map of Virginia," ThePortolan. no. 76 (Winter 2009), pp. 10-22. 

Wagner, Margaret E., Gary W. Gallagher, and Paul Finkelman, eds. The Lihraiy of Congress Civil War Desk Reference. 
New York: Simon and Schuster, 2002. 

Whitehill, Walter Muir. Boston and the Civil War. Boston: Boston Athenaeum, 1963. 

Wick, Peter Arms. A Handbook to the Art and Architecture of the Boston Public Libraiy. 
Boston: Associates of the Boston Public Library, 1977. 


Acknowledgements and sponsors 

It takes more than a general and a few officers to fight a battle, and we had an "army" that 

assisted in bringing tliis project to a conclusion. We gratefully acknowledge the generosity 
of the sponsors and Board members that made this project and all our work possible. 

We sincerely thank the many staff, consultants and committees whose expertise is evident 
in the "Torn in Two" catalog, exhibition and programs. 

M AY R Thomas M . M enino 


Liberty M utual Group 



Boston Public Library Foundation 

J aneSi Lawrence Caldwell 

Fidelity Investments 

Goodman Procter LLP 

Donna & M ark Leventhal 

Sherry & Alan Leventhal 

J udith & Robert M elzer 

M aryj o Otsea & Richard Brown 

Donna & Fred Seigel 

PaulaSidman & Family 


Associates of the Boston Public Library 
Save A merica's Treasures/ 
N ational E ndowment for the H umanities 




Ronald P. O'Hanley 

Alan M . Leventhal 

Hmdary Chairs: 
Senator J ohn F. Kerry 
Senator Scott P. Brown 
Governor Deval L. Patrick 
M ayor Thomas M . M enino 

J onathan C. Abbott 

J anet Atkins & Tarleton Watkins 1 1 

Robert L. Beal 

J aneSi Lawrence Caldwell 

M ichael Contompasis 

J onathan G. D avis 

Laura DeBonisSi Scott Nathan 

J ulieSi Ronald D ruker 

D rew Gilpin Faust 

M ary S( J ohn Fowler 

Susan V. Fried & J effrey B. Rudman 

William Ginsberg 

Robert E. Griffin, Jr. 

Ronald E. Grim 

Susan Hockfield 
Douglas M. Husid, Esq. 

Daniel J ick 
M ary & Eric J ohnson 
Stephen R. Karp 
Edmund F. Kelly 
Christine Kondoleon & 
Frederic E. Wittmann 
Alex Krieger 
H enry Lee 

Donna & M ark Leventhal 
M Uriel & N orman B. Leventhal 
Sherry & Alan Leventhal 
AnneSi Paul M arcus 
J udith & Robert M elzer 
Gil M enna 

M aryJ o Otsea & Richard Brown 
Robert Pemberton 
R. Robert Popeo 
Dr. & M rs. M itchell Rabkin 
Amy E. Ryan 
Fred A. Seigel 
Barry Shrage 

J anet H . Spitz 

Lisbeth Tarlow & Stephen Kay 

Karylann & Bob Walsh 




Jeffrey B. Rudman, Chairman 

Evelyn Arana-Ortiz, ViceChairman 

Zamawa Arenas 
J ames Carroll 
Donna M . DePrisco 
Carol Fulp 
BertheM . Gaines 
Paul A. La Camera 
Byron Rushing 



Robert M. Melzer, Chair 

J anet P. Atkins 
Richard H . Brown 
M ichael G. Contompasis 
Norman Fiering 
William M . Fowler 

Robert Goldman, Esq., Ex-officio 

Alex Krieger 

Norman B. Leventhal, F OUndeT 

Ronald P. O'Hanley 

Jeffrey Rudman, Esq., E^:-officio 
Amy E. Ryan, Ex-offiao 


William O. Taylor, H Ondary 

Robert F.Walsh 
Ann J . Wolpert 




Alex Krieger, Chair 

James R. Akerman 

Georgia Brady Barnhill 

La'wrence Caldwell 

Paul B. Cote 

Edward H. Dahl 

Norman Fiering 

William M. Fowler 

Alice C. Hudson 

Norman B. Leventhal, Foiuuhr 

Robert M. Melzer 

Patricia Molen van Ee 

Harold Osher 

Amy E. Ryan Ecc-officio 

Michael Stone 

Ann J. Wolpert 

Debra Block 
La^vrence Caldwell 
William M. Fowler 
Ronald E. Grim 
JVlonique Doyle Spencer 
Janet H. Spitz 

Debra Block, Director of Education 
Angela Bonds, Map Technician 
Stephanie Cyr, Cataloger 
Ronald E. Grim, Curator 
Janet H. Spitz, Executn'e Director 
Catherine Wood, Office Manager 

Elizabeth Prindle, Exhibulonj Manager 
JMary Francis O'Brien, Head, Central Library 
Susan Glover, Keeper, Rare Bookj Dept. 
Kimberly Reynolds, Maniucript Curator, 

Rare Bookj Dept. 
Sean Casey, Reference Lihrarian, 

Rare Bookj Dept. 
Jane Winton, Curator, Print Dept. 
Karen Shafts, Curator, Print Dept. 
Aaron Schmidt, Technician, Print Dept. 
Janice Chadbourne, Head, Fine Art j Dept. 
Charlotte Kolczynski, Reference Librarian, 

Miuic Dept. 
Henry Scannell, Head, 

Newspaper and Microtext Dept. 

Robert Segal, Segal Design 

Rena Anderson Sokolow, oneltree 

Dale Rosen 


David King, The Market King 

James Meade and BPL Facilities Dept. 
Anabel Vazquez-Rodriquez 
Andre'w Leonard 

Roger Farnngton 


Thomas Blake 
Bahadir Kavlakh 

Stuart Walker, 

Book Conservator, Boston Public Libraiy 
C. Allen and Wesley Carpenter, 

Green Dragon Bindery, Shrewjbuiy, MA 
Northeast Document Conservation Center, 

North Andover, MA 


John Hebert, Chle,f 

Geography anc) Map Divunon 
Edward Redmond, Senior Reference Librarian, 

Geography and Map Divuujn 
Diane Schug-O'Neil, Digital Converjlon 

Specialuit, Geography and Map Dwufion 
Margaret Wagner, Publications Office 
Tambra Johnson, Registrar, 

Interpretive Pi^ograins Office 



Richard Smith, Aixhivist, 

Cartogi\iphic Branch (i^etired) 
James Zeender, Senior Registrar 

Paula Matthews, Director 
Jonathan Lannon, 

Associate Director and Curator of Maps 
Catherina Slautterback, 

Curator of Prints and Photographs 
Stanley Gushing, 

Curator of Rare Books and Maniucripts 

Henry J. Duffy, Museum Curator 
Henry Lee, Trustee 

Robert Hannan, President 
Barbara Wicker 

Earl McElfresh 
Robert J. Carlson 
Law^rence Cald'well 

Karen Ciampa 
Jacqueline Gold 
Kevin Tucker 



[Inside front and back cover] 

A.T. McRae 
Richmond, [ca. XSdX^. Pruitec) map, 12 x 18 niched. 

One of the few commercially 
published maps prepared for a 
Confederate audience, this pictorial 
sketch depicts the Battle of 
Greenbrier River or Camp BartOAV. 
This relatively minor battle occurred 
October 3, 1861, in Pocahontas 
County, Virginia (now West Virginia), 
as part of Union attempts to separate 
Virginia's "western, non-slave holding 
counties from the rest of the state. 

Augustus Saint-Gaudens 
Coiirtejy U.S. Dept. of the Interior, National Park Service, 
Saiiit-Gaudend National Huitoric Site, Cornuh, NH